I completely agree with him. The guy is a f**k genus. Truly one in a billion.
"But an actual car, like a videogame, is interactive, so it's something used by people, so it's like a car where you have to drive it. There are 100 people driving a car; they have 100 ways of driving it and using it. It could be families driving the car. It could be a couple driving a car. The owner of the car could be driving along the coastline or they could go up into the mountains, so this car has to be able to be driven by all 100 of these people, so in that sense, it's totally not art."
I'm not sure what you don't get about that. It's a mutable thing, which unlike architecture or pottery, has no clear function. Buildings have a clear and defined function. Video games do not, their function is whatever the player imposes. Even music, despite being enjoyed and interpreted by an audience many ways, comes out as a single tune of the artists imagination. The function comes from the artist and a car or video game simply cannot have a single defined artist function because it is a "service" that will be used in various ways for various functions by different people. The inherent reason these can't be art is because the creator has no expectation of a unitary function for his work.