That would be for a single-instance test. When there is a rhythm going with many sequential "tests" the reaction time is much lower. The single test requires conscious thought, which typically consumes 250ms. Once the activity is learned, and the required action anticipated in a regular or semi-regular cadence, like in a videogame (!), the reaction time is significantly decreased.
Certainly the above 'learned activity' may be applicable for a few video games like Pac-Man, under the condition of a player following a maze pattern and knows their move in advance, or something along the lines of a tool assisted game as seen in TASVideos; however, for many (most?) games being engaged, the player is waiting for an action to take place on the screen (I.E. An enemy moves in a direction, a door opens, a platform motion/appearance, the correct position of a target or passing shot), prior to responding, and reacts with a corresponding directional movement or button press.
Similar for the test linked to earlier. In that case, the action on screen of a color change, from red to green, is met with a reaction click of the mouse from the individual. This can very much parallel what happens in video games, such as waiting for an enemy to show a certain action or vulnerability prior to being able to launch a successful (counter)attack, or determine in what direction to move next.
If anything, the argument can be made that at least the person knows what their reaction response should be in advance respecting the above test. In the case of a video game where a player is 'standing-by' (for whatever length of time), needing to react to a certain action, and the specific reaction requires a response that differs, depending on what transpires on the screen, there can be a longer response delay from the person: First, recognize when the time is right to (re)act; second, process what appropriate input needs to be accomplished; and then finally, match it accordingly.