Roger Ebert is clearly a ******. Just look at the production process of a game.
First off, most games have a neat little thing called concept ART. Where you sketch out the characters, and then after finding a good design, finalise it and add all the little details like the colors... it is the finalised concept art that makes into the game. Of course, it takes a lot of work to finalise concept art; characters go through tons of designs - in some cases, HUNDREDS - before a final one is settled on.
Since most videogames have characters, and characters need to be designed, then art certainly has its role.
And post-production, animators have to render the characters into the gameplay, which means more or less drawing the finished character all over again, but in a digital medium that can be manipulated.
The same goes for items, environments, etc. They all need to be sketched out and then have a finalised concept art.
Since art in terms of drawing/sketching/etc. plays a key role in the concepts of characters, environments, items, etc. and their rendering into the videogame world, then yes, I'd say videogames are an art.
Furthermore, if you extend art to mean all creative activity, HELL YES. Musical art needs to be composed by a variety of methods - A Capella, synthesizers, or all natural instruments. Then, the art of literature factors in at times, since somebody has to write the damned plotline.
Seriously, did that guy even think about all the creative energy that goes into making a videogame a reality? Concept sketches, rendering, musical composition, writing, and all the rest?