No, its not. I don't even get how you can say that. Did we play the same game?
All you have to do is run up to it and beat Big Daddies with a wrench. When they kill you, just run back and do it some more. There's nothing to be gained by being creative vs being thuggish and unimaginative. And the thuggish approach is faster and less resource intensive to boot.
Defend Bioshock for its attempt at narrative if you want; don't defend it for its cruddy combat gameplay.
edit: And I'll just point out that 2 small changes would have made Bioshock's combat a lot more interesting:
1) Make respawning in the vitachamber cost resources
2) Make all wounded enemies in the gameworld reset to full-health when the plcayer character respawns.
Suddenly it's a much different game, combat-wise.
What I meant is it's only fun if you get creative. I know Vita-Chambers suck, I even said so, and to make the game fun you really have to avoid them. We played the same game, I just decided not to rely on Vita-Chambers and play the game the way I wanted to.
Remove the Vita-Chambers and the combat is great.
How do SS2 and Bioshock have the same story or plot twist? Bioshock pretty much ripped off SS2 on a lot of gameplay elements, that much I agree with, but they didn't copy the story. How does