Login | Signup

Halo 3 Finally Free For Xbox Live Gold Subscribers

Jonathan Lester
Bungie, FPS, Games With Gold, Halo 3, Xbox 360 games

Halo 3 Finally Free For Xbox Live Gold Subscribers

Halo 3 was originally announced as one of the first Xbox Live 'Games With Gold,' but as the months following E3 2013 rolled on, Bungie's climactic shooter was nowhere to be found.

Until now. Microsoft has finally made good on their promise, so if you haven't played it to death already, be sure to grab it from the marketplace. You've got until the end of the month.

Add a comment9 comments
Breadster  Oct. 16, 2013 at 16:53

I wonder which ancient game will be next. Seriously, these games with gold deals are tragic.

JonLester  Oct. 16, 2013 at 17:02

Heh, it's not quite the PS+ Instant Game Collection, is it? MGS Rising, Dragon's Dogma, Remember Me, Motorstorm RC... yeah.

However, there's a reason for that. At the moment, PS Plus is entirely optional, and absolutely has to go the extra mile to convince people to pay the extra money. XBL, meanwhile, is mandatory for online play and is guaranteed to sell because of it. Microsoft doesn't need to put any more effort in than the bare minimum, and they're clearly not bothering.

Slightly OT: I wonder (if not downright worry) whether PS Plus will maintain its high standards when players are effectively strong-armed into buying it to play online, and Sony can rely on plenty of subscriptions without a strong Instant Game Collection lineup? Time will tell I suppose.

Last edited by JonLester, Oct. 16, 2013 at 17:04
kristianity77  Oct. 16, 2013 at 17:51

I think instant game collection will remain strong upon the PS4 release but only for owners of PS3 and Vita. I cant imagine any developers (apart from maybe smaller indie groups) are going to want to forfeit sales at the start of the consoles life. Especially when the install base will be small to begin with anyway.

I see it being quite minimalistic for the first 6 months as far as PS4 goes, then you might start to see a few games creeping in that were original release date titles that have already had the majority of projected returns from physical and downloadable copies.

But anyway, on topic, Its a bit of a long running joke this Halo 3 for xbox. I mean seriously, is there anyone with Xbox Live that wants to play Halo 3 that hasn't already been there and got the t shirt? You would think that because Microsoft had only agreed to do this for a few months and with the mess they had made in the previous months regarding Xbox One, that they would have done something to get people back onside as it were, or give them something that they actually want. Not something that has sat in a bargain bin for eternity practically for free anyway.

Breadster  Oct. 16, 2013 at 19:52

I think PS4 will have some decent games on there still. I don't think it matters as much for the next gen though due to the large amount of (seemingly) high quality free-to-play games coming out anyway.

Crazy Jamie  Oct. 17, 2013 at 11:02

I wonder if this incredibly poor selection of free games will actually harm Microsoft in some way. A regular comment on the internet generally is that ultimately this is something for nothing, which can't be a bad thing, but I'm not sure I agree. I am not currently planning to buy either the Xbox One or PS4 at launch, but as and when I do pick up one of those a relevant consideration is going to be which company I actually trust more to look after my interests as a consumer. Sony has provided outstanding value with PS Plus, and whilst I'm sure Microsoft is trying to target somebody with this lacklustre selection of free games, it clearly isn't me, the consumer who bought their console at launch. My 360 is hardly getting a look in over my PS3 now because of the PS Plus selection, and Microsoft are just not doing anything to remedy that. It genuinely makes me hesitant to believe that Microsoft are going to look after my continued interests as a customer if I were to take the plunge early on the Xbox One, and that simply makes me more likely to go with the PS4.

If I'm going to spend hundreds of pounds on a new console in the near future, I want to give that money to a company that will make a positive effort to keep me interested in that product throughout its lifespan, and quite simply in offering games like this Microsoft are just giving me the impression that I can't trust them to do that, or at least that I can trust Sony to a greater degree. Perhaps I am reading too much into this, and it may be that I don't speak for the majority who own both consoles, but that is genuinely how I feel.

tapi  Oct. 17, 2013 at 11:07

You're still comparing apples and oranges with PS+ and Gold. Gold has always been paid-for good quality online services and they've recently added a monthly game to download, whereas PS+ has been a paid-for access to instant games collection, with some services thrown in. With one you're paying the fee for access to more recent games, the other you're getting a freebie thrown in.

They're both good services. But it's a little bit like comparing your home broadband to the free wifi in starbucks. (paying specifically for one, as opposed to a 'sweetener')

For myself, I've been more than happy as there's only been two G4G that I haven't downloaded, one I've had and the other I wasn't interested in. I've played different games than I would normally buy and Halo never really appealed before (I may be in a minority) so will give it a go.

Last edited by tapi, Oct. 17, 2013 at 11:08
stevenjameshyde  Oct. 17, 2013 at 12:11

I agree that Gold and PS+ are very different services, but the reality is I don't really want to pay for more than one of them. PS+ seems to be the superior value proposition for me, and I have to say it's directly influenced my choice of which next-generation console to buy

donttouchthehair  Oct. 17, 2013 at 12:58

If they're going to insist on releasing 'classics' for free, they could have at least dressed it up a bit - for the first month they could have given us two games from the first year of the Xbox 360, in the second month we get the second year, and so on, giving us an informal history of the console (which would make up for the age of the games), and leading up to '2013' where they could release two games on the Xbox One, the month it launches.

But that would have required effort.

So it didn't happen.

tapi  Oct. 17, 2013 at 14:36

you know that would've been a great idea, donttouchthehair. Shame.

And it's strange, Crazy Jamie, but my preference is based on the same principle to you, but came to a different conclusion - I just don't trust Sony to look after the customer.. grand features don't materialise, capabilities retrospectively removed, accounts leaked, rootkits. I've had sony devices that are technically capable of something OOTB, but cynically hobbled to drive the consumer to peripherals etc. (just explaining my reasons, I agree there's two sides)

As a matter of interest does Sony offer anything similar to Xbox's live event streaming and channels such as 'the music room' (I honestly don't know) it seems as if Sony are 'GAMES! and home entertainment' and MS are 'games, and HOME ENTERTAINMENT! they actually offer the same but the perception is they're focussed on different things

Email Address:

You don't need an account to comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.