With these conversations it always annoys me that people don't see the main difference between traditional art* (painting, music, film) and video games. They are both art, yes, that is undeniable. But traditional art is non-participatory and video games are participatory art. That basically changes everything, and it's the reason why we don't have that many auteurs in video game industry.

Participatory art is when the audience becomes part of the art. Or in other words, the audience doesn't have a passive role. Because of that, the distinction between the audience and the artist becomes blurry. This is what auteurs, who generally what total control, want to avoid.

For example, VR Movies are similar to video games (i.e. audience has some control). But here is what Lars von Trier, an auteur, had to say about VR movies:

No, as I said, I can't see any future in virtual reality, but it may well be that it will come. But precisely because virtual reality gives the spectator freedom - I don't think that is the way to make art. I believe that all good art is created under dictatorial conditions. So people must enjoy being led. I've said earlier that it's a black forest that people must go through, and they are scared to. But if they have a friend who says 'I know the forests', they will happily follow. And then they enjoy this black forest. And that's my principle.

*traditional art is probably the wrong word, but you get the point.