Quoted By:
Most of my transit experiences around the world have been net positive, and I think this is true for most people as well. If it was truly a negative relative to other options and those options aren't nonviable due to cost, personal handicaps, or lack of other infrastructure, people will just forego public transport. You see this in the states where there are technically bus/rail options in larger cities, for example.
My most positive experiences would be in cities where public transport is unambiguously superior to other transport in regards to just living out my daily life, with bonus points for it being convenient for getting to places that aren't central hubs/high demand in a time comparable to other forms of transport. The overall cleanliness, comfortableness, and efficiency of stations/stops is great as well, but isn't a big deal for me.
Going by that, my best experiences have been using the metro in large East Asian cities, followed by varying experiences in Western Europe metros. Cities like Seoul, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Taipei have different pros and cons but are all at the top A-B tier. Less experience with smaller East Asian cities and larger Euro cities, but they are more B-C tier. I may have different opinions if I ever lived in the latter for work for an extended period of time.
Chicago's L and Metra are overall positive and I could see myself using it and bike over a car for most things in the city, but it is limited in range and transferring between lines is a pain.
NYC is more neutral, with greater range but overall less consistent commute experience and more crowding/BS/egregious filth on the lines. If I were to live in NYC I would make heavy use of it, but only because it often seems the least terrible.
All other non-bus metro I've used in the states are less convenient and cover a shorter range, and buses rarely get parity with automobiles/taxis/uber (Chicago was a nice exception, as well as a few smaller towns with light congestion).
