Is it? It's more about IFT enabling the devs to design their game poorly, isn't it? What if CDPR took great care to make quests reasonable?
That's exactly what I'm asking them to do: pretend that fast travel isn't in the game during the design and playtest sessions.
Still, that wouldn't solve all the issues.
For instance, having a fast travel constantly available would make extremely challenging to design proper encounters "on the road", it would make a proper, in-lore fast travel system redundant (which would make the game more painful for those who don't want to use the IFT, and it would be a missed chance to reward players with useful "teleport runes/stones" after some relevant accomplishment.
(i.e. the more important, the longer the journey may be), would IFT still be an issue?
yes, in the end, it would, but a far less concerning one. A negligible issue.
Still, the history of RPG video games teach us that what you are describing it's an unlikely scenario, until you convince developers to pretend fast travel isn't there at all.
But I don't think the problem is inherent in IFT.
Well, but I do, and to be completely honest I don't even think it's just a matter of taste or "opinions", I think whoever claims otherwise is either shortsighted or in denial.
^This. I'm afraid it's necessary in an open world game. ›››
Actually that's a strawman argument at its finest, as what he's suggesting ("Without IFL you'll have to ride 40 minutes to reach far places") is just false.
Without even bothering reading other people's posts, the poll itself is already offering a good amount of alternative solutions (runes, portals in fixed locations, etc) which make that statement untrue.