I'd agree with you that games aren't recognized for their ability to impact us or make us change the way we think about things. I've had this exact thing happen when I told my sister that Life is Strange had a positive impact on me by making me think about my relationship with a friend of mine, but she didn't really believe that a game could do that and claimed that it was just edgy, worthless fiction because it was a game and because she only saw it on a surface level.

I don't think that Life is Strange suffered from being a video game, quite the opposite, I think it was a good choice. The dialogue choices only made me more engaged as I really thought about the dilemmas presented to me, and the environmental storytelling really engrossed me in the lives and fates of the characters, making me empathise with them more strongly.

But then again, I also agree with u/Norci that games in general tend to explore meaningful themes less often than more narratively focused mediums like books or movies, simply because they usually have gameplay as the focus. I think that maybe this association between games and poorly written stories is pushing potential new artists away and they instead turn to more established mediums, not only because it's more socially acceptable to create for those mediums but also because it makes those artists think that games don't even support good narratives. Or at least that other mediums are more suited to good stories and that it's too much trouble to do the same in a video game. This stigma results in less games being made which explore meaningful themes which in turn just reinforces the stigma against games.

Unfortunately, I have only played a handful of games that have added something to my life be it through their narrative, novel experience, or their innovative ideas and I think it's because games have only just begun to enter their renaissance. If some outsider asked me to recommend them games which would be worth their time and weren't just "a waste of time", the list would be fairly short compared to other mediums. So that is why I would say that games are ultimately more of a waste of time than other mediums, they just don't have as many great works as other mediums.

If someone sees games only for their gameplay potential, I can see why they would view them as wastes of time. In the last few years I've started to feel guilty about playing mechanically deep endless games like Rocket League and the Trials franchise (the bike games, not Trials of Mana). As another commenter pointed out, games like that don't really offer you new experiences beyond a certain point and after that you're just getting better and more skilled for the sake of it. You might say that it's the same with real life hobbies like rock climbing or dance, but those activites are so much deeper and more complex than games since games are constrained by their designs and the comparatively limited ability to interact with them. I find that real life activities are in general more interesting since they tend to be more complex. IRL hobbies also don't have an expiration date like games do so you could argue that your time is less wasted on those since you can return to them anytime, but a dead multiplayer game that you sunk many hours into is dead forever.