Games

By itself, no. When appropriated by a human, yes. It'd be like how people appropriate landscapes, ambient sounds, resampled art, etc. in their own work sometimes. (note: this is not a claim on whether using generated shit is actually good or useful to society or to art creation because a lot of the ai-art conversation assumes autuer theory and people as lonely individuals who wish to control or own the entire art process and can't imagine or afford to collaborate with another human).

Art is about the transmission of meaning (symbols, thoughts, feelings, etc.) from at least one person to another. This definition is rigid in actually defining the function of art, but not in what physical objects or acts in this world are art, which is the opposite of what non-marxist normies on the internet and in this thread want where they just want a taxonomy chart of what established things are art rather than analyzing the social relation/function of it.