In my opinion, yes. I dont think it's fair to say "Fallout 3 is bad because Fallout 1 has this feature, but Fallout 3 does not."
That doesn't really mean anything to me. now if you were to say "Fallout 3 is bad because the main storyline is bad, the RPG elements to the game feel lackluster, dialogue and voice acting are sub-par, etc."
That's a much more valid gripe to me.

i started with fall out 3 and went on and played the rest. i love them all, and i understand that people are mad that 3 is different, but still, it's an amazing game. it's one of my favs of all time, i've sunk 100's of hours into it. i just love the whole series.

I had fun with Fallout 3, and compared to Oblivion, it's a god-send in terms of RPG-elements and story (still lacking in comparison to Fallout 1/2). However, it was trying to be a post-apocalyptic world. Instead, it felt like a campy 1950's scifi tv show, mixed with some survival-horror dungeons and campy characters like Moira Brown, Alistair Tenpenny, Dave, and everyone in the Oasis. The voice acting was pretty annoying too. Fallout 1 was much more atmospheric and immersive than Fallout 3, provided we define atmospheric and immersive in a non-industry context, i.e. not about having 3D graphics and bloom.