I am without a doubt more qualified to comment on this topic than our EU members who have never left their cold, muddy hut in Western Europe.
After traveling through and staying in tens of US states, I have noticed a correlation between the size of a city and the type of tourist attractions that it provides. I will explain them below, using North-Central and North-Eastern Illinois as a prime example.
"The big cities are useful for finding the smaller surrounding cities. Chicago is a big tourist attraction. Chicago has cool stuff, but you really go there (and to most big cities) to consume things, whether you be at a concert, a restaurant, a mall, a park, etc. It is heavy on the mind (Noise pollution, stress from having to acclimate to a foreign, rigid, compartmentalized schedule, language barriers, etc).
if you go to the smaller cities like Naperville, Elgin, Aurora, Chicago Heights, etc, you don't have to be uptight about your time management, things are cheaper, the people are friendlier and also not mentally ill from behavioral sink caused by the western urban lifestyle. In smaller cities you can really get to know the people and the culture apart from the events and experiences."
- KoF, 2025
