If Bioshock Infinite had stayed closer to the demo that was shown during E3 2011, I would have probably considered it the best:

The demo just made the environment, enemies, and Booker and Elizabeth seem much more interactive than what was experienced in the final product, which I didn't think broke as much ground as the original.  While I still enjoyed Infinite, that demo inflated my expectations of the game.  Thus, I still consider the original Bioshock to be the best entry in the series.

Bioshock was better in its time then Bioshock infinite is now.

Infinite is really bogged down by awful gameplay. Endless wave after wave of boring enemies. Just awful for 2013. The story was great, but as I have seen it said a few time now, It just didn't belong in that game.

Bioshock > Infinite > Bioshock 2


Bioshock had everything at its time. Great gameplay, awesome story, fantastic world. There was really nothing to complain about except the end boss.

Bioshock 2 took the gamplay even a small step farther while playing it safe, but it was obviously not as original and the story couldn't hold up. Still a very good game though. It also introduced multiplayer and had really good DLC.

Infinite had just like the first Bioshock an amazing story line and a beautiful crafted world, though I personally preferred the atmosphere of Rapture. That seemed much more mysterious. The enemies in Infinite were sadly not as interesting as I hoped them to be and the Vigors weren't as important as the Plasmids in Bishock IMO. The gunplay is decent but hasn't evolved one bit.
IMO it's a bit sad that the choices you make in the game have no impact for the ending and almost no impact during the game.
Elizabeth is a great companion and a very useful addition to the game. Sky-Line riding also works as well as the videos made it seem.
Only thing I really hated was (again) a certain boss.

Holy...wow, just wow. I haven't played Infinite yet, but the footage in reviews and on youtube looks nowhere near that intense. Like the infamous Killzone demo, however, it seems a bit too reliant on cinematic scripting to work with a player who's not necessarily playing to said script.

That demo just made me feel so hyped, from how Booker's and Elizabeth's actions seemed to be based on the player's actions (deciding to euthanize the horse, pointing the gun at a heckling Vox Populi guy, etc.) to the much more interactive enemies and environments (e.g., a bunch of enemies riding on the sky rails, using powers like Bucking Bronco in concert with Elizabeth's powers to materialize a cart and hit the floating enemies, etc.).

If the finished product had stayed closer to that, we probably wouldn't just be debating which Bioshock was the best, it would also be a lock for game of the year (which I don't think it will be, if some of the other games releasing this year turn out as good as they seem).

Bioshock 1 as i haven't played infinite yet and 2 is pretty much the same as the first one

I'm still undecided between Bioshock and BioShock Infinite. They have such different atmospheres. BioShock has the better vilains for sure with Andrew Ryan, Sander Cohen and Frank Fontaine. Infinite compensates with Elizabeth who is truly great.

The gameplay is pretty similar but I think the vigors are more fun to use than the plasmids. I liked the customizaton in Bioshock better and I also liked collecting random items to craft ammo and other stuff.

All in all, I still can't make a decision

Does the final game have any of this kind of interaction?

Bioshock 1.

Which boss, and why?

OT: I think that Infinite barely edges out 1. Unlike many here I actually prefer the atmosphere in Infinite. Some of the gear and Vigors in Infinite made the game too easy in my opinion, but the game for me was all about the story and atmosphere.