I think Fallout 1 is much better than the first, but not in terms of fun factor or stability.
Fallout 1 has a much more interesting storyline, a much better start and great atmosphere. For me Fallout 2 has better gameplay, and better sidequests, but the humour and story seems a little more forced.
I enjoyed them both immensely, however, and they are ranked somewhere in my top 10 favourite games.

I go back and forth on this one. Right now, I'm a FO2 guy--but that's because I played that one most recently, I think.

Between you and me, I think I'll always like FO1 a little bit more if I really have to choose simply because the first one was so fresh when I first played it, and I had such fond memories of Wasteland that I was thrilled to see it's spiritual successor. FO1 was a wonderful new surprise at every turn. But there were game play issues (Get out of the door so I can leave the room, moron!).

FO2 was a cool game, but the story was a bit more conventional. But I still love the story in FO2! And the game is much bigger, the game play is more refined (better NPC control), there is a car, and so on. They're both great, though, so I highly recommend playing them both. I have many times, and I'll go back again.

I wish that "move out of the way" thing was in fallout1, but i was more interested in the first fallout rather than the second. For me it was a nicer game even if it was smaller.

I prefer 1 over 2, only because it had perhaps a more targeted vision and story. I don't think you will much trouble at all making the leap to two. Its a great game filled with fallout goodness.

While I do love FO2 plenty and the things it added that improved on FO1, I will probably always feel that FO1 is the superior game. The story, atmosphere, music, the whole nine yards. I think I might have liked FO2's henchmen a bit more though, and of course the ability to tell them to move was definitely a gigantic plus. :P

I like the second game more overall, mostly because of the lack of time limit.

I haven't played Fallout 1 because of a really annoying glitch: the screen goes black every few seconds.

But I'm playing through FO2 right now for the first time and I really like it. Mind you, I've finished New Vegas already and I played FO3 two years ago. Because I kind of played the games backwards, my opinion may be skewed. Marcus FTW!

I have to add my voice to those who prefer Fallout 1. This is mainly because I thought the story and atmosphere were better, and it just drew me in more than the second. I also felt that the second game was a bit long, but it was nice to able to reach those high-level perks; I finished the first game before reaching a high enough level to try any of them out.

Very true...I never got the Sniper perk in any of the 3 times I played the original. Got it without a problem in FO2.

Thing is Fallout 1 was designed by whole team together as one complex unit. But in Fallout 2 locations were split between different people and they were put together at the end. It worked pretty well considering enormous extend of the game, but this different approach is still noticeable. That's why story and atmosphere works much better in the first one.

That explains why in FO2, most areas had containers that were well-loaded, while others had areas with completely empty containers.

Fallout 1 by far: NPC's were far far richer for my sticky fingers. :3

I agree with the opinions of most who have already posted here.

I prefer Fallout 1's atmosphere and primary story arc, while Fallout 2 improves on all of the other aspects of the game.

I've never found Fallout 1 to be too short or Fallout 2 to be too long (despite Fallout 1's timer or Fallout 2's more numerous locations and lack of timer).

Fallout 2's story arc suffers from a slight lack of originality because the plot is essentially the same as Fallout 1 only less unique.

Where Fallout 2 shines is not in the main quest, but the side quests. Especially the quests that link the politics of NCR, New Reno, and Vault City. In Fallout 1 none of the locations are very closely connected as they are in Fallout 2.

Personally, I prefer the first. Even though I haven't finished either of them, I found Fallout 1 to be easier to get into, as the second seemed incredibly hard to me. It might be because I stink at the combat, but I generally find it hard to be good at something I don't like.

Kind of torn here, but I guess I'll have to side with FO2.

FO1 is the more coherent, complete package. There's the atmosphere and there's the plot. You're in this desolate place with a desperate mission and it all stays together until the best ending ever.

FO2 is a little bit of this and a little bit of that, you really cant guess what's going to come up nex. There's a bewildering variety of stuff you can do, many ways to accomplish the may and varied goals. The game doesn't take itself at all too seriously (contrast to 1 which was serious all the time) and some of the stuff in there is just hilarious. There is the plot and it's as compelling as anything! But the whole affair has a bit of a carnival feel to it, which some are bound to dislike but I personally love.

Hey, I'm the kind of guy who thinks The Last Crusade was the best Indy flick...