I think part of the issue is that video games are so expensive to develop, and the level of technical proficiency required to create a video game is relatively high compared to other media. You can film a movie on a handheld camera, you can record an album in your garage with basic equipment (or even solely with software), and if you have the vision/talent then it can be fantastic. The ability of the everyman to make contributions to these fields has spurred their development tremendously, IMO anyway.
But to create a modern video game requires a combination of very different abilities and extensive knowledge. To create what might be considered video game "art" you need not only the vision, but also the ability to write very complex code, develop graphics, animation, etc. Now of course some people/groups of people are capable of doing this independently, but it seems like it would be so difficult without the resources of a big developer. So instead of video games for the sake of video games, you get video games for the sake of sales, and that's where the "99%" argument comes into play. Why take risks when you'll sell 10 million copies of Madden 2030?
Also, video games are relatively young, so of course there's time to develop the field.
This is completely changing with the advent of Iphone, Android, XBA, and PSN games btw. Have you heard of Minecraft? It's being developed by one person. It's kind of a complete abstraction of game art. I'm not even including Flash games developed by one or two people. If anyone think games can't be art they should definitely check out the Experimental Gameplay Project
. I think it's one of the coolest things to happen in gaming.