The first time I saw the trailer I just said "oh, so, more bioshock but in the air. At least that looked kind of cool I guess." Then about a day after I watched it again and really thought it over. I came to the conclusion that Bioschok infinite has potential to be awesome. The thing that Irrational does well is atmosphere. The atmosphere was so good in Bioshock that the underwater city of Rapture was the main character of that game. The city had a presence and the story was all about it. Ryan, Fontaine, even you were just a mere pawn on the board while Rapture plays a game. The new city of Columbia seems brighter, more open, but with a dark undertone. Hopefully Columbia can be as good a main character as the first one.

The first time I saw the trailer I just said "oh, so, more bioshock but in the air. At least that looked kind of cool I guess." Then about a day after I watched it again and really thought it over. I came to the conclusion that Bioschok infinite has potential to be awesome. The thing that Irrational does well is atmosphere. The atmosphere was so good in Bioshock that the underwater city of Rapture was the main character of that game. The city had a presence and the story was all about it. Ryan, Fontaine, even you were just a mere pawn on the board while Rapture plays a game. The new city of Columbia seems brighter, more open, but with a dark undertone. Hopefully Columbia can be as good a main character as the first one.

I know what you mean. Irrational does a good job of making you care of your surroundings and the people around you. That to me is a great game design (Ken Levine FTW). I'm particularly interested with the main character because unlike the first two BioShock games, the protagonist in BioShock Infinite will have more personality and identity and he'll talk a lot more. I like that. I never liked characters who don't speak for the wrong reason. 
 
I'm so anxious to see more of Infinite.

Bombcast guy was right that Ken Levine deserves the benefit of the doubt.  The concern is that the marketing 'necessity'* of it being a Bioshock game may force the game in one direction when they might have otherwise gone in another.  
 
I disagree that it's 'only a name' - if that were so I don't think Sequelitis would be so much of an issue.  It's them having to justify the use of the name that creates the problem.  Will they go out of their way to shoe-horn a Bioshock tie-in where none is warranted?  Will their hands be tied by having to make the gameplay feel at least reminiscent of Bioshock?  The issue isn't the name on the box, it's whether or not that name hinders the quality of the game, in return for helping the marketing.  I have no doubt it will be a great game, but will it be as good as it possibly can be?  Or will the name hold it back?
 
*Conventional wisdom says that it's a necessity to call it Bioshock, but I'm not so sure about that either.  Bioshock sold well, but not that well.  It's in the same ballpark as something like Borderlands or Far Cry 2 iirc, not a Halo, a GTA or even an Assassin's Creed.  I don't believe that Bioshock was that big a deal beyond the 'informed gamer' market, and if anything they / we seem to be fatigued on Bioshock rather than chomping at the bit for another one.  I believe a new franchise from this team could be just as successful as Bioshock, and there's the possibility that it could have been even more successful (again, the sales numbers weren't that unbelievable).  In fact, I thought this was the whole point in taking Levine off Bioshock 2 to work on something new in the first place; so they'd have two healthy franchises instead of one milked franchise.  Somebody over there got cold feet between then and now.