Intentions are irrelevant. None of the premises suggest that a creator’s intentions have any influence on whether something is art. Also, any assumption about “most” video game creators will be too weak to guarantee the conclusion that no video games are art.

This says that if an aesthetic experience (such as a video game or work of art) is interactive, then it’s not controlled by its creators. We know that video games are interactive, so the conclusion now follows: video games aren’t controlled by their creators, so they’re not art.

Contrapositive: if something doesn’t produce a rich aesthetic experience, it’s not art. But do all video games produce a rich aesthetic experience? We don’t know. So (C) doesn’t lead us to the conclusion.

An assumption about what’s typical will be too weak to guarantee the conclusion that no video games are art. Also, whether or not a player also happens to create games tells us nothing about whether the things a player experiences are controlled by the game’s own creators.

What matters about a game’s aesthetic experience is whether it’s controlled by the game’s creators. (If not, then games aren’t art.) (E) doesn’t tell us anything about creator control. In fact, it doesn’t tell us anything that’s relevant to aesthetic experience at all.