Much like comic books and fantasy art which is largely derided by most in the 'artistic' community.
So because the 'artistic' community is elitist, games cannot be art? That's a rather weak arguement. There are a lot of people who draw comics that are artists (like Carlos Ezquerra and Frank Miller), and a lot of people who write comics who are artists too (Alan Grant and Stan Lee), and some do both (Will Eisner). Just because something can be appreciated by more than a select few, does not mean it isn't art. I don't think anyone whose seen (for instance) the frescoes in the Sistine Chapel can disagree that it's art. Because Michelangelo was a genius, not because only high ranking religious officials understand its significance, but because its geniunely awe inspiring.
Games just have more elements that have to come together perfectly, and requires more artists to work in perfect harmony. If Michelangelo had to work on the Sistine Chapel using a team of 100 painters, would it still have had the significance it does today? Probably not. That's the challenge games are faceing.
An example. Programmers can definately look at the DOOM3 (or more recently the 3DMark 2006) engine and see art. I mean a lot of what it does, is masterfully created by incredibly talented people. The fact that it has an average game (or in the case of 3DMark, no game at all) bolted on, doesn't mean that it isn't art.