Ok, just read it. Doesn't seem to be written in the same negative tone that the original Bioshock critique I read was. But
"The coin-flip scene represented an ideal point to give the player the decision of calling heads or tails, but Booker is scripted to always call heads. This is done purposefully, as removing player autonomy from this scene tells us it is impossible for a game with scripted elements to be truly player-driven."
I don't think this is correct. You were able to call heads or tails; it wasn't scripted. The coin landing on heads is what was scripted
Which is the whole point of the game, Infinite is partly a commentary on choice in games, games can only ever present the illusion of choice, even something like Mass Effect which made it's name from the choices you could make ended up boiling down to only 3 different scenarios at the end of the 3rd game.
The scene near the end with the multiple light houses and the multiple Bookers and Elizabeths represent other players who have played the game, we may have made different decisions whether to throw the the ball at the couple at the start, get stabbed in the hand or not etc but we all end up in the same place regardless of our choices, like all games we generally have to follow the will of the game designer. It's just something that has been cleverly integrated into the game, the coin toss the choice of choker mean nothing in terms of the game, but you can also give your own meaning to them. For instance the only reason I picked the choker with the bird on it was that I hoped initially that it meant Booker would end up freeing Elizabeth, the game confounded my own expectations on that choice.