FFS!
And I'm quoting this for the history books given you have zero understanding.
I found episode 2 to be letdown after 1 - do you think the series improves as it goes?
(please be as spoiler free as possible).
I was invited but didnt go.

News sites and imdb.com seems to feel it is a good TV series. Even I have gotten interested, but I figure should I first play Fallout 3,//New Vegas/4 first, just because? (I have already finished Fallout 1-2 and Tactics).

As far as I can tell, it isn't that "woke" either, and ethnic diversity makes sense in the Fallout universe, even the games were diverse in that sense. This is not God of War Ragnarok in a Norse setting.

I think the Fallout show is a triumph. It took three episodes to find its footing, but then shines in all departments. Rare that I'm coming across something nowadays that I have no real complaints about and am happy with, but this is one of those occasions. It looks good throughout, the story arc is clever, the writing and acting stellar in places. Glad this is on track for a second season.

Yup.
I said before that I liked it, but I must recognize its a 'dumb' show.
Its fun for the game references and all (soundtrack if you like them, game sounds, game themes..), but Im not expecting anything New Vegas level of existential phylosophy. (Well lets see on Season 2..)

Though Im really expecting they give Ghoul a good character arc.
After the show stablished Ghoul's past and future, If I keep watching it on Season 2, it will mostly (or maybe only) because of his character, as it was in first season.

Not because Max or Lucy are not good characters necessarily, but because Ghoul's past and present search makes him a good and complex character to root for in my opinion.
I think Max was badly written, and Lucy feels weird sometimes, though she played well the 'naive vault dweller coming out to the real world' and that was nice initially
Also, a Plus for Critical Drinker's honesty on letting MauLer and Reaper give opinions contrary to his after he posted his first impressions video. MauLer gives some good points when critizing the show.

Critical drinker i think has such a low bar after so many bad movies from Hollywood and in general, that if it at least tries then it may be worth watching. And again if you can just turn your brain off, maybe it's good watching.

I'd need a little higher than his bar though. I don't think i can turn my brain off and when really really stupid things happen and really really big inconsistency between two scenes, or 'this happens so the plot can go on' really irks me, and if person didn't do oblivious stupid thing and screw things up then the movie/scenes wouldn't happen in the first place.

Guess that means I've gotten pickier as my age progresses.

Reaper's video and review of the Fallout TV series... very unflattering. Sounds like we don't have anyone competent in Hollywood anymore.

Anything particularly special about this reviewer?

Off hand, not specifically; Reaper is one of the debaters with The Critical Drinker a few days ago; If i hadn't watched the debate (or not recognized his voice from that debate), i probably wouldn't have given it much attention; Except that it just showed up on my feed. Maybe i should start watching out for his content now.

If it helps any almost everything he talks about in regards to nitpicks he shows on screen. He breaks down everything that doesn't make sense, including the whole plot of season 1.

Considering:

- Its a tv show spawned from a computer game francise. An especially intelligent francise, with deep lore, but still.

- Its on Amazon Prime, who are known to be especially bonkers about their political ideology.

Its really not as awful as one could expect.

For example, Lord of the Rings has an even much deeper lore than Fallout. And boy did it get godawful stinking piles of absolutely nonsenical crap tv shows recently.