I'm assuming they both have more onboard processing capacity and the default controllers don't have the hardware to re-map controls.
Steam input is extremely powerful and does it all in software, though. You can run most non-steam games through Steam, and if it's a game that's also on steam, you should be able to use the Steam app ID to find game specific mappings (though I haven't personally done this).
Because it's low quality and stuffed with trash.
If it's real food you freeze and reheat it's different.
I said it wouldn't be negligible. It would be literally zero.
The increased volume in lower income regions is massively less than the lowered revenue in the first world in every case. Regional pricing is "bonus" revenue from low income regions. It does not offset the first world in any way.
No, it won't. There's no point on the curve where low income regions have any possibility whatsoever of enough volume to affect it in any way. It's not a matter of "affording" anything, because adjusting to satisfy those regions is lower revenue than ignoring them.
It won't have a negligible impact on pricing. It will be literally zero.
No, there's not even a theoretical possibility for that to happen. Lower priced regions are lower priced because there aren't a meaningful number of people in those regions able to pay first world prices.
Lowering the global revenue by whatever small amount those regions bring doesn't somehow incentivize publishers to lower revenue further by lowering prices in the first world. It makes no sense to think it does.
Behave is a great (if fucking beefy) read on a broad variety of influences on human behavior (it's 1B to Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Slow on my nonfiction list), but one expert's opinion on something as inherently unmeasurable as free will doesn't warrant a news story.
It's pixel art. The limited color space is part of the aesthetic.
Your stance on membership is full on looney tunes.
It's not a statement that allows for the possibility that a person has even a shred of intelligence or sanity.
No, they are not.
The fact that they're making more net money from those regions than they otherwise would, by definition, makes it literally impossible for you to be subsidizing them. The alternative is not listing in those regions, not lowering prices for you. There is no theoretical world where you get a cheaper price in developed countries without regional pricing in lower income regions.
"Making more revenue with negligible cost of distribution" and "we're subsidizing poor countries" are not compatible.
Do you really think they're going to make more revenue by making the pricing more than they're willing/able to pay?
Because if publishers did, they wouldn't offer regional pricing.
I bought it, but for a tech company their tech is pretty shit.
On ESPN, if I want to watch 4 games, there are a couple different layout options, and I can pick and add each individual game at my discretion. With YouTubeTV, they have predefined choices of games you can watch. It's not a complete list of combinations, and you don't have layout options (ESPN gives you a one big, 3 small to one side option that's nice). I have two actual TVs where I watch games so the layouts are less of an issue, but I can't put a game on one screen then the other 4 I want to watch on a second screen as background unless I get lucky and it happens to be one of the choices they gave.