I bought Fallout 1+2 and played them. Even though they frustrated me at first with the way too frequent enemy encounters (a problem I had to fix myself in the data pad file or w/e), I enjoyed them and began to feel they were better than FO 3. But after I was done with both I felt they were just too short and I wasn't very interested in playing the game again any time soon.
I've recently replayed Fallout and Fallout 2, for the first time in a couple of years. Fallout was nostalgic and rather good; an aged, oak tinged South African Shiraz one could say. I have to concede that it lacks much replayability for me now days. It was great replaying it, but I wouldn't fancy doing so again, for a while anyway. I've played it so many times over the years; the plot - whilst epic - is neither long, nor structurally complex. The game just isn't long enough. This doesn't at all detract from what playing it was like back in the day; my first go with it, 1998 I think, was by far the most vivid and compelling gaming experience I have ever had. I remember arriving at the Mariposa military base for the first time, whilst playing it at 4am, and being amazed at how immersed it made me feel. The soundtracks to several of the locations are truly capital. Great times
Fallout 2 though? As a first time gaming experience, it doesn't stand with Fallout for me. The serious, dark elements to the environment you find yourself in, are somewhat diluted and replaced with decent but sometimes seemingly out of place humor. I still enjoyed it immensely though, it was a worthy sequel in it's own right. The aspect of Fallout 2 that I think is a triumph would be the big quests involving Gecko/Vault City/Redding/New Reno/Broken Hills/NCR. By this I mean the quests that take place across multiple locations, and the resulting power shifts between VC/New Reno/NCR. This for me, along with the largely good dialogue throughout the game, makes F2 incredibly replayable - even now. The game can be approached in multitude of ways, getting the most out of the excellent S.P.E.C.I.A..L. system and allowing for excellent replayability. With some mod tweaks it can be made a reasonable difficulty as well, Fallout is too easy after playing it for over a decade. Some of the locations offer a downside however. New Reno for example. Other locations are good but clearly unfinished. Broken Hills. A smooth, but rather quirky-around-the-edge French Merlot. Very good day-to-day drinking.
I don't know how anyone can fail to love their first games of Fallout (1+2), even now. Unless you dislike actual RPG's that is, in which case you ideally would find it hard to enjoy any of the series.
Funny, I actually rate Fallout Tactics and Fallout BOS, well at least parts of the last, better than everything that was in Fallout 3.
I rate Tactics ahead of Fallout 3, but (even parts of) BOS? I thought it was a bloody awful game myself. Your probably referring to specific themes and incidences in it I guess, in retrospect I can see 'good points', but they are few in number and floating in a sea of shite. BOS was a distinctly unpleasant experience; I put it down quickly and didn't pick it back up.
Fallout 3 is deeply flawed, and as BN alluded to, once the Obsidian Surprise! factor wears down, you're left with an insult to your intelligence. Even so, my first go at 3 was substantially more enjoyable than any part of BOS - which was a cruel joke, and a masterpiece of gaming disasters in my mind. Fallout 3 fails at being a Fallout game, POS fails at being a game.
Hope this helps.