I think it's all a matter of oppinion, but I like the combat system used in this game.
The only think I don't like is the velocity in wich every character moves, but this can be adjusted in the options.
If you don't adjust the speed in the options, your foes will move fast as a rock.
About your problem, in Boneyard, you can install the Mash resolution patch if you want to see more what's going on in the place.
And if it's your first time in Fallout, and you don't now how to do some quests, or if you just wanna know how many quests there are in every cities, I recommend you to read this excellent walkthrough -> [url=http://user.tninet.se/~jyg699a/fallout.html]http://user.tninet.se/~jyg699a/fallout.html[/url]

I really can't say whether it is better or not because I haven't actually played through Baldur's Gate 2 before, but I certainly am fine with the combat. Turn-based combat used to feel cheap and time-consuming for me in the past, but I eventually got used to it. The way in which one is able to target a specific part of an enemy's body is so different from most games. Why is it that games like Final Fantasy XIII have not implemented an idea like this? Is it because this would likely result in forcing the game to take on a mature rating? Either way, I like being given the freedom to attack your enemies this way, and I prefer it over just attacking your enemy by randomly shooting at him/her/it.

I like the combat and actually prefer it to real-time (id est Planescape, Baldur's Gate I/II, etc).

Fallout's combat I find to be somewhat simplistic and tedious. Especially with many combatants and non-combat NPCs in the area. I don't mind TB combat, but it has to be interesting. The comments from the NPCs and the text in the corner, and some of the death animations, and targeted shots are a bit novel in the beginning, but after a while it wears off.

I enjoy it a great deal, for the most part. I really do enjoy the lack of direct control over party members as this more properly embodies the experience of one person on their own in the wasteland, though the experience is somewhat lessened by followers suffering inexplicable onset of severe mental deficiency at inopportune moments.

Well, controlling 6 party members instead of one isnt tied to a combat system. See Fallout tactics where you get to control them all but it got both turn based and realtime combat.
(i used real time at the end game cause the battles got too repetive)
Imagine contolling only one character in bg2...
Ok this is funny for a single playthrough but only if you have already beaten the game before.
But turn based is still better in this case, because you can control you pc far more accurate without pausing every second.
And one tip: be happy they all died in the boneyard, they get super useless in later game stages anyway, cause they cannot equip armor in FA1 i think.

First of all, I like the Fallout combat system.
It is quite similar to that of the best turn based strategy games such as Jagged Alliance or X-COM.
The truth is that the turn based combat, through not real, allows you to perform certain actions (prone-stand up-shoot-prone or shot and then hide behind a corner...) which are highly tactical. This way you can control combat very efficiently.
However, I liked the realtime combat in Fallout Tactics.

The Fallout combat system shines when you use it right. You can duck in and out of cover, disarm enemies, watch in horror as a stray round gunning for you hits a child (happened to me once) and in glee as you shot hits its mark, square on their forehead.

I do like the combat in FO 1&2, it allows lots of tactical options.
It does have flaws, however, mainly that turn-based combat really isn't meant for large-scale fights (the Boneyard is the worst but there are others), since they quickly become boring. Waiting 3 minutes to be able to take another action is not my idea of fun.
The second flaw is that it makes the game rather imbalanced, since dexterity becomes by far the most important attribute in combat.
The third flaw is the horrible NPC AI.
It's perfectly possible to have really interesting and challenging turn-based combat (Jagged Alliance and X-Com are great examples), it's just that the combat in Fallout wasn't as well implemented, imho, as in those games.

I love the turned based system.. for me, i just makes things easier.. the thing i do loath about it though, is the NPC AI.. i would love to be able to control them myself, instead of having them combat shotgun burst me to death at any given moment :P..

Have to agree with DarthJDG, that the turn based system used in FO1 and 2 perfectly suit the Lone Wanderer style of the game. Just couldn't imagine how fun the non combat parts of the game would be if the game had pausable real-time, etc, If any other type of combat had been used, I believe the non combat part of the game wouldn't have been as good. So you have to look at the game in the round, I believe.

Stop insisting on Fallout's combat system being tactical. You are either hopelessly outmatched and outgunned, or strong enough to take on anything. There's literally nothing in between. Once you get the equipement, only critical shots can kill you, and before that, pretty much anything will kill you. There is that very, very short and fragile time in between where tactics matter, otherwise you just stand in place and shoot bad guy wherever it does the most damage.
Don't get me wrong, I LOVE Fallouts. Fallout 1 is in my top 3. But if it's combat system had half the tactics of BG, it would be ... Well, more tactical, not actually better 'cause I don't really care :D
Still, Fallout 3 employs nice, dynamic real-time system and if you manage to restrain yourself from running backwards and shooting (... by the way, I was doing that a lot in original Fallouts as well, so STOP CRITICISING THIRD FOR IT!), and insist on using VATS for all your shooting needs, it's suddenly wicked awesome.