PEAK feature

Co-op climbing game, PEAK, has sold 5 million copies

Aggro Crab and Landfall have announced that their co-op climbing game, PEAK, has sold over 5 million copies. PEAK was released on June 16th. This means that it took almost a month to hit its 5 million goal.

PEAK has managed to capture the attention of PC gamers from the moment it came out. Right now, it has Very Positive Reviews on Steam, and it’s priced at only 7,49€. And, honestly, I believe its low price is one of the reasons it has managed to sell so well.

PEAK is a co-op climbing game where the slightest mistake can spell your doom. You can play it solo or with a group of friends. If you play in co-op, you will be able to help each other up ledges, or place ropes and climbing spikes to make the way easier for those who come after.

The game right now has 4 biomes, each with its own life-threatening obstacles. As they climb, players will discover a variety of helpful survival items. For instance, you can find energy drinks, climbing spikes, and the mysterious Anti-Rope.

It’s worth noting that yesterday, the devs released a new patch for the game. Update v1.7 re-added the ability to throw items at fruits and beehives to knock them down. It also brought a number of balance tweaks. For instance, Rope Shooters and Anti-Rope Shooters shoot 50% more rope. Rope Spool now has a weight of 1 instead of 0. Anti-Rope Spool and Anti-Rope Shooter now have a weight of -1. Chain Launchers cannot be shot above or below a certain angle past the horizon line.

Patch v1.7 also fixes some bugs. For example, it fixes a problem that prevented users from using backpacks. It also fixes a bug where items in the temporary slot didn’t count toward your weight. Another fix will allow you to light a campfire when a friend joins back into the game.

PEAK is using Unity Engine and appears to have relatively low PC requirements. PC gamers will at least need an Intel Core i5 clocked at 2.5 GHz with 8GB of RAM and an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 or AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT. The devs recommend using an Intel Core i5 clocked at 3.0 GHz or an AMD Ryzen 5 CPU with 16GB of RAM and an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 or an AMD Radeon RX 7600XT.

PEAK became a surprise indie hit. People started talking about how fun it is, and that helped it get popular. It also helped that the game is cheap and got a lot of attention on YouTube and Twitch. Big credit to Landfall for making it a hit so quickly.

Below, you can find the latest trailer for PEAK. This will give you a pretty good idea of what you can expect from it. So, be sure to watch it.

Enjoy and stay tuned for more!

PEAK | Release Trailer - Out Now!

30 thoughts on “Co-op climbing game, PEAK, has sold 5 million copies”

  1. Only on steam you can reach these numbers, on Epig fail store it is not possible, there are only children and homeless people who redeem free games on Thursday LOL 👍🤣

        1. lol, you think epic keeps updating fortnite out of charity? Regardless of your low opinion of EGS, wishing a game to only be big if dependent of Steam is r-tarded.

          1. accept reality, the games you buy if you want high numbers you have to rely on steam, there is no point comparing a free to play game LOL you are desperately trying to convince people that on Epig fail store users buy games, when in reality they only play fartnite because it is free and they wait for the free game on Thursday

          2. Nah, there are thousands of games doing poorly on steam. You want to sell the delusion that it is steam driving sales rather than the game quality or viral appeal. Also being “free” doesn’t mean what you think it means, it’s fortnite alone paying for all the free EGS games due to how much money the game can make…

          3. if they do badly on steam, on Epig fail store they do even worse dead market, in fact even Ubisoft has returned to steam, accept the reality now Tim sweeney has failed LOL poor Duke nukem, moreover Randy should sell the IP since in his hands it is a disaster, not by chance he is friends with Tim sweeney double LOL 👍🤣

          4. "if they do badly on steam, on Epig fail store they do even worse dead market"

            No, if Tim pays for temporary exclusivity they get to recoup their dev costs entirely, LOL 👍🤣

          5. yes but they have no profits, nobody buys anything LOL, meanwhile Epig store is at a total loss and third-party revenues in 2024 fell by 18%, a real TOTAL failure LOOOOL 🫵🤣

          6. No problem, only news of this type, now Epic store we can rename it Epig fail store 👍🫵🤣

          7. No problem, only news of this type, now Epic store we can rename it Epig fail store 👍🫵🤣

          8. Nice strawman, let’s be honest they released a generic souls like and wasn’t confident they would suceed in an already oversaturated market, there’s no guarantee it would get sell better without the Epic bonus, hell there is no guarantee they would even have the funds to develop the game without the Epic bonus.

  2. i legit dont get why people thought this game was interesting, i like climbing too but it was the coop element that sold it to them, meanwhile it was the visuals that make me skip the trailer.

    1. They bought it to be in the "cool kids club" with their peers, who play whatever bandwagon game their favourite streamer is currently on.

  3. Really scummy how John will only make an advertorial for a indie game if it manages to sell 2 million plus.

    1. Pretty sure he reports on indie games which most major outlets don't bother to do. Games like Pulsebreaker was mentioned 6 days ago on here. Didn't even know of it till I saw that article.

      1. Only because he could tie in to a major franchise like Resident Evil, notice the wording in the blog post. He flat out recuses to mention a indie game being offered for free on game stores when it comes bundled with a AAA game, like it would cost him nothing to announce the game even in passing.

        1. That's a fair assessment, but I believe we've reached a point where games are consistently compared to one another. Even if it wasn't mentioned in the article, we would still compare it to Resident Evil in our minds. But the game being reported just to attract clicks and nothing more is plausible. I guess it depends on how other indie games in the past were covered on this site.

          1. It’s more about total contempt for gaming and it’s audience than just comparing games to one another. Say there is an adventure game you could make a story about and compare it to I Have no Mouth and Must Scream, Myst or whatever, but those games are not big anymore, so John doesn’t care at all.

          2. I don’t know, I think you’re maybe reading too much into it. Generally speaking, people have a collective herd mentality and only care about whatever is relevant. Much of the past is mostly remembered through memes, word of mouth and within niche communities. You mention those once relevant games but what about games from genres that are practically dead like 3D platformers, instrument-based rhythm games like Guitar Hero, rail shooters, etc.? Nobody ever seems to care about those aside from indie developers and communities and a bunch of those games have been covered before on here throughout the years; whether it was Kickstarter/Indiegogo or Early Access coverage.

            There are indie outlets which dedicate their efforts to shining a light on those insignificant projects but I don’t think this site ever claimed to be one of those. However, occasionally, John will bring up incredibly niche upcoming games like “Simon the Sorcerer Origins,” a prequel to a game I had never heard of that was released over 30 years ago. He mentioned this game last month, despite the fact that nobody in this community seemed interested enough to comment on it. What does that reveal about people? They are more inclined to rant and gossip about the latest Battlefield news rather than engage with lesser-known titles that clearly doesn’t appeal to them.

          3. “However, occasionally, John will bring up incredibly niche upcoming games like “Simon the Sorcerer Origins,” a prequel to a game I had never heard of that was released over 30 years ago.”

            Yeah this one is an oddity for sure, makes me suspect he received money to promote it, given his past behaviour.

          4. Even if that’s true, I don’t see anything wrong with it as long as the game is of decent quality or has the potential to be good. If it generates interest among some readers, then it’s a win all around.

          5. If it is sponsored, or he is related to the project in any way, a disclosure would be necessary.

          6. I report on anything I find interesting. Also, what I find interesting may not be what someone else finds interesting. At the same time, what someone else finds interesting may not be that exciting to me. As simple as that.

          7. Well, yeah that’s a simpler way of putting it. Although we have our differences, we all seem to have a similar taste in games. This shared interest is why many of us frequently come back.

        2. That's a fair assessment, but I believe we've reached a point where games are consistently compared to one another. Even if it wasn't mentioned in the article, we would still compare it to Resident Evil in our minds. But the game being reported just to attract clicks and nothing more is plausible. I guess it depends on how other indie games in the past were covered on this site.

    2. Another flavour of the month, gimmicky livestreamer bait game? Yawn.

      Good for the developers, I hope that they save/invest the money and don't rush and buy Ferraris or whatever. People will move on as soon as their favourite streamer, which they have a parasocial relationship with, starts playing the next "new hotness".

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *