The most basic and broad definition of art is a "skill" or "craft". Art refers to the study of, use of, product of, and experiences derived from a creative skill. In this sense, virtually anything that is a product of human minds can be considered art, leading to phrases like "the art of battle" or "the art of medicine" and other such things. So to discuss whether video games are considered art (they are) in this sense is not very interesting.
But then there is the distinction between art and fine arts, which is where the art/literature/music/etc canons referred to in the OP fall. I think a simplistic definition of fine art is a vehicle for communication of the artist's ideas and emotions, a way for the artist to communicate with those that appraise it, and of course it has to succeed in doing so.
Video games are basically a conglomeration of many other art forms brought together in an interactive experience. It is the product of the creators' imagination that communicates to the players the world that the creators envisioned. Video games as a whole have the same potential as other forms of fine art for the expression of emotion. So yes, video games are artistic. But communicating with the players is not the primary purpose of video games, entertainment is. And of course, while games like, say, Okami are almost certainly considered "art", that obscure 8-bit game from the 90s no one has ever heard about probably isn't.
There are such things as "canon" in the different genres of art, literary canon for example. Shakespeare's plays are considered "art", your middle school classmate's poem for english class is not, but both are forms of literature. I don't think "on the whole" any art form can be considered fine art.
That being said, there are many games I would call fine art in a heartbeat.
tl;dr - Yes video games are art, but depends what kind of art you're talking about.