I don't follow your line of thinking. You could also say that game designers should abandon the narrative aspect of video games altogether since they will never surpass classic literature. Video games are a distinct phenomena from both art and board games and thus should be judged as such. I suppose you could argue a game is a game, thus making video games irrelevant compared to chess, but that's not really fair -- it's like comparing classical to metal, in that one clearly has more depth than the other, and yet we continue to listen to both. I wonder why that is. Perhaps because metal has a more relevant message in today's world?
As far as games being designed for dullards, that is true for some games, but not all. I'd say the intellectual rigor posed by video games is roughly parallel to that of any other medium: some are for complete dummies, most are for average people, and some are for the bright ones.