I may have phrased that poorly. I meant more the controversy about whether or not the ending actually made sense within the context of the story and the universe. I don't want to start spouting off like I'm some kind of authority on narratology or anything, but good twists shouldn't be leaving players confused and in disbelief. It's fine to surprise them, or even shock them, but the reveal still needs to be accessible enough to players to work as a satisfactory ending. You can't just throw something bizarre and convoluted at the players and then say, "Now go try to figure out what the hell it is that you just saw and how it actually makes sense." Like I said, it's a self-contained medium.
The work speaks for itself, but you have to extract the information and take it with you and think about it, in my opinion that is the least you owe a work with which you choose to engage. I don't accept "people had to write essays to try and make sense of it, therefore it is bad" as solid reasoning for the dismissal of what we can probably agree is an ambitious but hugely flawed attempt at broad scope storytelling; after all, if your logic held water, many great novels and films and paintings and even pieces of music would be considered trash simply for having people write about them for the sake of trying to understand them. As long as there has been "art" there has been criticism and discussion, and, dancing about architecture or not, these ancillaries have been vital to developments in thinking for both creators and observers, the same is true, if we accept them as art, of video games. I do not consider
Infinite to be an artful game, but there is something to be gained from analysis of its plot and gameplay, from thinking about which things work and which things do not, and furthermore why that is.