>>1514997Same deal for me. Though I think I'd switch the two, I'd rather live in a city that has quick access to good out than live out with good access to the city.
Main reason is because I need to get to work daily, and work is in the city for me. Another reason is that outdoors gives me a slow-burn satisfaction, and the city offers convenient recreation. I need to prep, get in the zone, and hit critical mass for good out satisfaction. That all requires at least a few hours. But I can go to a cafe or a bar in the city if the mood strikes me and get some satisfaction out of it without much primer.
So if I can really only put the time in for good outdooring on the weekend I might as well live in a metro.
Of course it depends on what city you live in. I'm in a city of 1.2 GMA population. Not to big. We also have a lot of urban parkland to tide me over, and traffic isn't heavy so getting out on the weekend is no fuss. Plus its a pretty conservative city so theres not a culture of faggotry or nihilism like in some cities.
