Up for Free now

http://marketplace.xbox.com/en-US/Product/Halo-3/66acd000-77fe-1000-9115-d8024d5307e6

Halo 3 is up for free for Xbox Live Gold Members now. It's not showing up on the dashboard but you can find it with the link provided or by going to the games tab> browse games> on demand> A-Z> H > Halo 3

So then it isn't free?

You know what? Fuck them. Sony give how many free games away every year? And they're usually more recent then this. Give away Halo: Reach or even Halo 4. This is why people who claimed Microsoft want to make the next Steam with the Xbox One annoy me... they have done nothing to gain the trust of their userbase and continue to show how far behind the times they really are. For the record my 360 has been my primary console since the midnight launch year ago... so I'm not a Sony fanboy.

Jesus, I like a mental.

/rant

Flashback to 2007

Shhhhh

@pandabear: How many people are going to keep complaining about this before it ends? I'm currently playing the campaign for Rainbow Six Vegas, which I got for being a gold member, and I'm having a blast. Little less bitching would be nice.

@bigjeffrey: 'Finish the FIght!' ...6 years later.

@razielcuts said:

Can't stop the fight, it keeps making money.

My point is Rainbow Six Vegas and Rainbow Six Vegas 2 have BOTH been free on PS Plus... Microsoft should be working much harder than this to show that Gold is still worthwhile ... make some big bold gesture. They need something to get people back on side.

yay i am excite clap clap

Rainbow Six Vegas can also be found in GameStop for literally three dollars, whereas PS Plus gets you things like Shadow of the Colossus, Ico, Saints Row: The Third, etc.

You get to keep these games.

Oh boy, two games I don't care about and one I got on PC for 5 bucks along with all the DLC...seriously though, I just don't believe in looking a gift horse in the mouth.

I'm not leaving them. Just because PS+ offers more games (with more strings attached, btw), that doesn't mean I'm all of a sudden going to jump ship and have to get used to a controller that feels obsolete after having used a 360 controller for the past eight years. I just don't find it appealing, and I'm perfectly fine with the games we've been getting with GWG. It just doesn't seem like that big of a deal that I would feel like complaining.

Wait... it took them this long to deliver on that deal announced at E3?

@greggd: Those were just three games that I could remember off the top of my head. The point is that PS Plus typically has higher value or newer games available for its subscribers, whereas Free with Gold only has games that are either laughably cheap or comparatively old.

Meh.

I hate it when people say that. Yes, they're old. Yes, they're usually cheap. But they're still awesome games. Hence why I'm perfectly fine with it.

@greggd: Sure, they're awesome games, but they're awesome games that a large majority already owns, since they came out early in the console's life cycle. If it was a balance of older giants and new kids on the block, it'd be more understandable, but as it is it seems like Microsoft is taking the cheap way out. At least that's the given impression to me.

Because a lot of people can only afford to get one of the upcoming consoles and developing an irrational hatred for the other company is the easiest way to justify to yourself why you don't need them both. This same thing happened with the launch of the PS3, Wii, Xbox 360, GameCube, Xbox, PS2, Dreamcast and so on.

It's sad that even giving away free games can have this effect, but this is the time we live in. Just wait one or two years and things will ease out.

I hope the playlists get a nice boost from this. Halo 3 is fucking awesome.

I do apperciate the effort. It's just getting a game i got AGES ago with my 360 when i first got it is a bit silly.

The comparisons between the PS+ stuff and the Games with Gold stuff is completely valid. the PS+ system offers much better stuff.

I played rainbow six vegas for an afternoon before GTA5 arrived from amazon, it was neat. extremely dated, but neat.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining. I enjoyed the shit out of that free Magic cards game they gave awhile ago, but come on. We all know they could do better.

@starfoxa: I've owned a 360 since June of 2006, and the only game I've gotten a double of thus far has been Assassin's Creed 2. Also, the arcade games they've put on offer have been fairly recent, for the most part. And lastly, I'm pretty sure the reason we're not getting hot, new releases from third parties, at least, is because when it comes to PS+, it's conditional. They are not yours carte blanche. With GWG, you get to keep them, even if your gold status lapses. I would imagine Ubisoft would be a bit more apprehensive to give up copies of Assassin's Creed III if it were guaranteed that anyone who stops paying for PS+ would still have it. It's a sales cannibalizer. At least, that's how the companies are looking at it, no doubt.

Not really as I am getting both. PS4 at launch, Xbox One in early 2014. I own a PS3, 360 and Wii now so I have no console bias, I'm just saying that giving away Halo 3 is stupid, they may as well have given away Halo 2. If they want to win the hearts and minds of gamers switching who are from 360 to PS4 they should be getting fucking aggressive right now... giving away the first Halo game on their now seven year old console is a nice gesture, but I think they should try harder.

Still the best Halo multiplayer on 360 in my mind, even with the poor netcode.

Dope, I miss this game, I played it a lot but never actually owned it. It's a pretty weak offering compared to what PS+ has but still anything is better than nothing.

So I ended up already owning every single game they have put out with this program. Not going to complain though, for those that didn't already have them, good for them.

Here I am, it's me, I'm that one guy that doesn't own Halo 3.

The only Halo games I ever played were Halo 1 and Halo Reach. Honestly if it was Halo 4 I would've actually given it a try but Halo 3 doesn't interest me at all.

M-maybe .. maybe next month.. something good will ... pop up..

The last good Halo game. RIP Halo, you will be missed :(

Yaaaaaaay Halo 3 is easily one of my personal favourite games ever and even tho I still have a copy of it any reason to play more of it is fine by me!

Warface looks Meh.

Halo 3 is exactly what I've been waiting for. I already have all the map packs from back in the day. Let's get this 50!

Halo 3> Halo 4> Halo Reach ;)

i wonder how many people with gold don't already have this? not many I'd imagine.

Meh, it's free so I might as well get it, right?

Or.. I guess Activate it so I have it ready for download in the future, but not download it because.. I'm not exactly gonna be playing it.

Also what's with the super childish hostility towards Sony's choice of new ass games to give out for "free" and Microsofts old ass choice of "free" games?
They're just video games, so take the sticks out of your asses, shut the fuck up, relax and just play the games you feel like playing.

Sounds like a great deal for someone who still has gold running but an awful deal if not. You can go down to a game store and buy Halo 3 for cheaper than XBox Live Gold.

Nobody anywhere including Microsoft is telling you to go buy XBL just for a free copy of Halo 3. Your logic sucks.

If you say so because telling me "Halo 3 is free" isn't true. I can not turn on my XBox 360 and get it. On the other hand I was able to get Fable 2 for free a year or so ago because it cost me $0.00 to buy it and download it. To get Halo 3 this way I would have to buy a membership which at that point I might as well go down to a used game store and save some money.

And for the record I've never suggested anything offer by PSN+ is free either.

What are you even reading?
No mention of you mentioning PSN+ being free ever happened.

Are you speaking to the voices in your head? :P

If you like Halo and have XBL Gold, I can't imagine anyone not having Halo 3 unless they are maybe under 15. That's my real issue with this.

I was anticipating a possible response. Sorry it is a pet peeve of mine when someone says something is free but it is not. I would never ever suggest anything offered under these programs are "for free".

It's "for free" for people that already subscribe to the Xbox Live Gold service. There you go, you can sleep easy now, brave knight.

A lot of us traded it in 5 years ago though. Then noticed the new Halos suck and now want to play 3. Any "good" game they give away is going to already be owned by tons of people.

haha Thank you for that.

That argument doesn't really hold up under scrutiny. Yes, you are correct that you don't technically "own" the games you get as a PS+ member, but I doubt many people ever end up actually buying the game, even if their subscription lapses. The main reason is PS+ is the same price as a game. If someone wants to play one of the games again after cancelling PS+, they could either go out and spend $30-$50 and buy that game or they could spend $50 and once again have access to the dozens of games available on PS+, plus future "free" games. Even though you don't technically own these games, the result is the same: almost everyone will never buy these games after receiving them with PS+.

It's fine if you're okay with Games With Gold, but there is no argument to be had when it comes to value comparison between GMG and PS+. Games with Gold is a token gesture by Microsoft at the tail end of a console generation. It doesn't really gain them anything, no one is going to subscribe to XBL to get Halo 3 at this point, it's simply a PR move. PS+ on the other hand is a serious initiative by Sony to entice people to become paid subscribers. Sony took the approach of offering a value based service where as Xbox Live has pretty much always been a tax in order to use your console to the fullest. Sony's approach has definitely gotten them better public perception, but XBL has been more successful.

So, the comparisons are somewhat relevant from a gamers' point of view, but it's clear these two services aren't trying to accomplish the same thing. The big comparison will be next gen when both services are required to play online. It will be a much more interesting discussion about which is the better value when both services are essentially required. In the back of my mind I worry about how Sony's strategy will change when they don't have to continuously convince people to stay PS+ subscribers.

@ll_exile_ll: I think it has more to do with the ubiquitous nature of XBL Gold, versus the new concept of PS+. When Ubi puts out a game on PS+, for example, they probably weigh the amount of people actually on the service. I'd bet the adoption rate is miniscule compared to XBL. So I suppose the risk is a lot more palatable for them when it comes to PS+. I dunno. I think my logic is sound, scrutiny or no, but you're entitled to speculate, as that's really all I'm doing, anyway.

Yes, that does make sense and could be a factor, but that wasn't the point you made previously that I was responding to. You said that lack of true ownership was a reason publishers were willing to put more recent big names games on PS+, but as I said before there are reasons why that doesn't exactly make much sense.

I think the idea that the number of XBL subscribers compared to the number of PS+ subscribers is a lot more spot on, and like I said I am really interested to see how Sony handles the instant game collection once PS+ becomes a requirement for online play.

I think it's a bit of both of my points, but yeah. It's probably more about the adoption rate. This is going to get very interesting over the next generation, that's for sure.

95% of XBL is under 15, so everyone is getting a new game.

There's a 100% chance that this WILL NOT include the map packs.

Still the best Halo game on 360.