> If you need real-world examples of why and how this would be useful, just say the word.
I always need that. That is mandatory. I have no evidence that the sampling mode impacts performance in any meaningful way. Can you provide data that backs up this assumption/assertion?
It's a combination of:
1) Visual Quality - Rendering in low-res and upscaling when the window is small (640x360) and how it looks with linear v. point sampling. It looks horribly blurry when linear sampling is turned on and the quality is set to low, and like pixel art when it's set to point sampling. Leaving the sampling as point when rendering in high quality results in overly crispy art with heavily aliased edging that's visible even when viewing at 2560x1440.
It'd be a shame to have to either deal with blurry visuals when the game is set to low quality to better support low-end Intel HD graphics chips or deal with crispy visuals in high-res on computers with more capable GPUs. Having two separate .exes for the game isn't an especially attractive option when we're talking about supporting multiple platforms and potential sales channels for a commercial game. To savvy end-users, that would just look sloppy, and they'd be right about that.
2) There's definitely a difference in FPS when using linear v. point sampling on Intel GPUs. It doesn't seem to be an issue elsewhere outside of a few years-old nVidia cards (460, 470) that still receive driver updates so out of date drivers are most likely not the culprit. I can send you my game's project files so you can see it for yourself when running on any Intel HD chip (I've tested on Intel HD, Iris, 4000, 4400, 5000 chip variants), but I can't publish it in the forums because it's a commercial product. Should I send to the support email address?
Also, and this is a bit off-topic but still hits upon the kind of configuration options computer gamers expect, a VSync action in the nw.js object would be pretty nice too .