I don't accept all this dismissive talk as if the contradiction cannot itself be effective or interesting..
Sure.
The Line or
Tyranny are maybe better examples than
Bioshock, in so far as they were more clearly aiming at being about something other than themselves, and don't make players' sense of agency go all over the shop in the same way.
(
The Line doesn't provide a huge amount in the way of choices, but the rest of the game supports its linearity and the obvious necessity of certain actions to progress. By contrast dealing with Ryan in
Bioshock can't really be made to work, whether you lock the player in an office with him until it's done or do it in a cutscene.)
I think the problem that a fair few people have with it is that: We've got the general idea that games can make the player play out unpleasant things in service of a story, and the story here
seems to "sometimes bad situations mean you've got to do bad things". Which is
fine as far it goes
[1], but seems a bit much to spend tens of millions on and then be very pleased with yourself about.
You're not necessarily supposed to enjoy it, or take gratification in it.
Hmm.
The Line certainly plays to its strengths by becoming a miserable slog towards the end. If TLoU2 is absolutely awful to play, I'll hail it as a masterpiece.
First thing I'd like to know is how you find out they have names.
Eulogies.
"Should we gather for whiskey and cigars tonight? Oh no my doggo,
Frances! Got something, we'll look in to it." - that sort of thing.