Native Mac Client

[AshleyDragon]

Now that Switch 2 has been added and FFXIV has been ported to support ARM architectures please consider a native client for macOS, it would be great if it supported game mode as well and it increase the performance notably, currently the official client for Mac suffers a lot on the new alliance raid.

[Bubert]

The fact that we do not have a native Mac client is laughable… And they dare charge us money for it when the client can’t even run properly in the first place.

I still hope that in the future they’ll fix this… Many game companies don’t have any issues optimising their games for Mac.
Heck even Wow runs on it smoothly like butter on breadies.

[PaulusHamsteru]

The fact that we do not have a native Mac client is laughable… And they dare charge us money for it when the client can’t even run properly in the first place.

I still hope that in the future they’ll fix this… Many game companies don’t have any issues optimising their games for Mac.
Heck even Wow runs on it smoothly like butter on breadies.

It just goes to show how incompetent Squeenix’s devs really are.

[AshleyDragon]

The fact that we do not have a native Mac client is laughable… And they dare charge us money for it when the client can’t even run properly in the first place.

I still hope that in the future they’ll fix this… Many game companies don’t have any issues optimising their games for Mac.
Heck even Wow runs on it smoothly like butter on breadies.

Indeed, this is one of the few games and mmos that support Mac, but don't support it correctly for some reason

[AshleyDragon]

Where did you get that from? Did they make a press release or give any interviews confirming it? There's a higher chance of the game running on a translation layer than it being a native ARM version. It'd explain why the game is reportedly targeting 30FPS instead of 60.

Windows doesn't even have DX12/Vulkan versions, and you're expecting an ARM one? Gotta temper those expectations.

There's a really low chance that it is running under a compatibility layer on Switch as Nintendo don't allow it, the 30 FPS is obvious to keep battery life, but this thread isn't about Switch but rather a native Mac version for paying customers, please stay on topic or just create another thread for the Switch version.

[AshleyDragon]

So we're really just speculating, huh... not interested then. Without confirmed sources, this is a pointless conversation.

Asking for a native client for macOS is not a pointless conversation?

[Uzephi]

There's a really low chance that it is running under a compatibility layer on Switch as Nintendo don't allow it, the 30 FPS is obvious to keep battery life, but this thread isn't about Switch but rather a native Mac version for paying customers, please stay on topic or just create another thread for the Switch version.

Bringing up the fallocy in the original post is definitely on topic. You claim Nintendo doesn't allow compatibility layers yet Nintendo themselves use said layers for their old games. Not just the emulator built in for the retro games, but even OG switch games played on S2 are in a type of compatibility layer to play properly with a completely different GPU architecture. 30 fps is abysmal, that is definitely due to some underlying compatibility layer and not for battery life. The battery life argument falls flat when it still gets 30 fps when docked. Games that always drop performance in lieu of battery regains the performance when docked.

[AshleyDragon]

Bringing up the fallocy in the original post is definitely on topic. You claim Nintendo doesn't allow compatibility layers yet Nintendo themselves use said layers for their old games. Not just the emulator built in for the retro games, but even OG switch games played on S2 are in a type of compatibility layer to play properly with a completely different GPU architecture. 30 fps is abysmal, that is definitely due to some underlying compatibility layer and not for battery life. The battery life argument falls flat when it still gets 30 fps when docked. Games that always drop performance in lieu of battery regains the performance when docked.

I'll stop answering about Switch info in a Mac thread, this is not the place to talk about FFXIV fps in the switch port, this thread was created to provide visibility that Mac still doesn't have a native port all these years for an officially supported port, if you want to continue discussing Switch 2 features please create a new thread.

[Uzephi]

I'll stop answering about Switch info in a Mac thread, this is not the place to talk about FFXIV fps in the switch port, this thread was created to provide visibility that Mac still doesn't have a native port all these years for an officially supported port, if you want to continue discussing Switch 2 features please create a new thread.

Then simple: edit the comparison out of your OP. You brought this conversation about by bringing an improper comparison in your post. There is no proof the Switch 2 port is running native ARM code and evidence proves otherwise. If a brand new client/console isn't getting native support for its architecture, what in the world makes you think an old client for an OS the developer barely acknowledges would get it also?

Edit: and even if, somehow, that S2 client is running native ARM code. Would you want that slideshow on your Mac? Serious question, if the S2 cannot handle more than 30fps, how much would your Mac Fair... If this client was running native ARM code and performing that horribly... Remember; the S2 can run some pretty demanding titles at 60 fps docked, so the fact a game that easily runs at 60 fps on last gen hardware barely running 30 fps is pretty bad. I'm all for you getting a native client, but you wouldn't want the S2 client even if it was running native ARM.

[Bubert]

Bringing up the fallocy in the original post is definitely on topic. You claim Nintendo doesn't allow compatibility layers yet Nintendo themselves use said layers for their old games. Not just the emulator built in for the retro games, but even OG switch games played on S2 are in a type of compatibility layer to play properly with a completely different GPU architecture. 30 fps is abysmal, that is definitely due to some underlying compatibility layer and not for battery life. The battery life argument falls flat when it still gets 30 fps when docked. Games that always drop performance in lieu of battery regains the performance when docked.

All this doesn’t even matter. What matters is if they can make Ffxiv for Nintendo console then why is Mac users are getting abandoned? We get a crappy client with crappy graphics included at times.

There’s no excuse for SE since other game companies don’t have any issues for making their games to run beautifully and smooth on Macs.