Well the obvious answers are:
a)
Director (which is available on the Mac ... in fact it was originally Mac only, and only became available for Windows as of version 3.5). I have no clue how to get Unity content into Director preserving bones, etc. since C3D doesn't have W3D support and I don't think Director supports FBX (I have Director 11, but it's very buggy -- actually by far the buggiest version of Director I've ever used).
b)
Unity (which is cheaper and seamlessly imports Unity files). Unity Indie costs $200 and is just amazing. You can animate a figure in C3D, simply save the file into the Unity project folder and voila, it's there. Drag it into a scene and it just works. In fact several of the C3D users on this forum (including myself) are here primarily because of C3D's ridiculously good Unity integration.
While Director is more obvious, Unity is better. Director's 3D engine hasn't been significantly updated since it was released in 2001. Internally, Director treats 3D as a plugin versus an intrinsic part of its UI. (Unity treats 2D as a plugin ;-) but does a nicer job with 2D than Director does with 3D.) So a scene is basically an opaque object with either code or behaviors required to deal with its content (whereas 2D elements can be selected and edited in the UI with no messing around).
For that matter, Director's 2D engine is incredibly out of date. It doesn't have hardware acceleration, or do decent compositing (e.g. when you play video in it you have a choice of lousy framerate or no ability to layer stuff on top of the video). Director's UI widgets are still basically HyperCard-style (if you want native platform GUIs you have to stick them in a dialog box and implement them 100% in code) and not only look horrible but don't support any modern UI components such as sliders and combo boxes.
Macromedia had basically been treating Director as a cash cow with pretty much worthless updates since version 5, while putting all its attention into Flash, Dreamweaver, and ColdFusion. Adobe may be
planning to do serious stuff with Director, but not until version 12 (when they will be, allegedly, updating the 3d engine). Director 11's main new feature is Intel Mac support (and so far I haven't been able to run anything successfully in the Director 11 shockwave plugin).
Finally, Director has a long and tragic history of adding half-arsed features and then ripping them out again (rather than fixing them) leaving anyone who used them high and dry, this includes:
- Changing the text i/o component such that every project using text i/o was broken (Director 5 to Director 6)
- Multiple mutually incompatible implementations of anti-aliasing (Director 4, Director 5, Director 6) before a mostly useful implementation (Director 7).
- Adding QD3D support then ripping it out and replacing it with nothing (Director 6.5 to Director 7)
- Adding complex vector support and then stripping it out (Director 9 to Director 10)
- Replacing the 3D physics system in Director 8.5 with a new, incompatible one in Director 11.
I can only hope Adobe does a better job with Director than Macromedia did post version 4 (1995!). Thirteen years of neglect, broken promises, etc. have made me pretty cynical (and I have owned Director licenses for Mac and Windows since 1995, and been using Director professionally since 1991).
Edit: I replaced FireFox 2.0.0.14 with 3.0b5 and reinstalled Shockwave and now, finally, my old code works (with a few blemishes).
) files can be furthered by exporting to Macromedia (Adobe) Director and writing lots of scripting code