Is it better to buy in Orange County or in Las Vegas, where homes are much cheaper but resale could be riskier?

It depends on whether this is an investment or the home you'll live in, because the two get judged by different math. If it's an investment, look at cash-on-cash return (what the rent covers against the mortgage payment and expenses) plus the long-term appreciation case for that market. If it's your home, it's a lifestyle tradeoff. Plenty of people move to a lower-cost area on purpose, buying a modest home on one income so a spouse doesn't have to work, and that can be the right call for a household even if it isn't the best pure investment. On appreciation, cheap doesn't automatically mean stagnant. A few once-cheap markets (Boise, North Idaho, Eastern Washington) have matched or beaten expectations over the past couple of decades. That said, fully built-out, supply-constrained metros like Southern California, the Bay Area, and New York have structural scarcity that easier-to-build markets generally lack, and that scarcity has historically supported long-run pricing. Nobody can promise one market outperforms the other. Weigh resale risk honestly, and don't assume the cheaper metro appreciates like the constrained one.