In case anyone hasn’t played it the original 1997 Fallout is still the best one, you can snag it on GOG, I believe it runs on DOSBox.
If someone has enough time to give it a try: look up on the Internet the controls beforehand and have very balanced SPECIAL, otherwise you won't reach vault 15 (the first mission). Also, there is a gun behind a toilet in that vault, even if you can't see it when looking for it there. Don't bother trying to escape if the mutants capture you.
Those are the acivities I lost too much time figuring out, which can be quite a turn off in the start. I well spent much more time enjoying the game.
P.S. SPECIAL can't be upgraded later
IMHO Fallout 2 was a lot better; it's a lot larger and has a lot more story to it. Neither game has aged especially well though. The UI in particular is awkward.
Underrail is a pretty good "modern Fallout", although it also shares some of the general problems (e.g. too much reliance on randomness, can be unfairly hard unless you already know the game well, bit of a walking simulator at times).
Both views extremely subjective. Some judge the '97 and '98 as "excellence" and Vegas as "excellence bound to compromise with the times". And still dream of a proper sequel to the original (same line, style and features).
Oh by the way: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a4/b0/ff/a4b0ff508d5e7fda4a6a...
Looks like it's from "Fallout New Vegas isometric concept": https://www.artstation.com/artwork/nQrlXo
As far as I can see, it's just a bunch of graphics, and not an actual game.
It's still perfectly playable of course, and none of that is "core" to the game, but it doesn't take much imagination to see how it could be improved and I don't think it's uncontroversial to state that many players will at times be frustrated by some of these things.
Part 516,415 of "I wish they'd just release the source so people could improve on these little things which would also improve sales and makes complete sense from a business perspective".