Top Global Sellers During the 2025 Steam Summer Sale

[Zed Clampet]

I had to do some last second list cleaning and ended up with the top 17, which feels a bit arbitrary, but these are the sales leaders among games that are on sale. There are a few games, like Peak and Dune Awakening, that I removed from the list since they are full price, and there's also your regular assortment of free games and the Steam Deck, which I also removed.

Rank		Name	%	Price	Rating	Release	Follows	Online	Peak
1		Cyberpunk 2077	-65%	$20.99​	83.98%​	Dec-20​	1,496,368​	44,424​	1,054,388​
2		ELDEN RING	-40%	$35.99​	92.24%​	Feb-22​	1,089,143​	44,094​	953,426​
3		Dead by Daylight	-60%	$7.99​	78.63%​	Jun-16​	1,593,450​	86,084​	120,717​
4		Red Dead Redemption 2	-75%	$14.99​	91.06%​	Dec-19​	880,077​	40,732​	99,993​
5		Clair Obscur: Expedition 33	-10%	$44.99​	94.67%​	Apr-25​	212,032​	25,712​	145,063​
6		Rust	-40%	$23.99​	86.67%​	Feb-18​	1,209,174​	171,055​	262,284​
7		Sons Of The Forest	-66%	$10.19​	86.89%​	Feb-24​	587,109​	32,011​	414,257​
8		Baldur's Gate 3	-20%	$47.99​	96.05%​	Aug-23​	943,052​	67,199​	875,343​
9		HELLDIVERS™ 2	-20%	$31.99​	76.68%​	Feb-24​	453,609​	46,778​	458,709​
10		R.E.P.O.	-20%	$7.99​	95.16%​	Feb-25​	223,851​	53,893​	271,571​
11		NBA 2K25	-86%	$9.79​	58.01%​	Oct-24​	49,378​	23,456​	56,948​
12		Ready or Not	-50%	$24.99​	83.25%​	Dec-23​	495,259​	13,722​	55,174​
13		Stardew Valley	-50%	$7.49​	97.66%​	Feb-16​	953,123​	69,566​	236,614​
14		Forza Horizon 5	-50%	$29.99​	87.68%​	Nov-21​	511,657​	17,375​	81,096​
15		Black Myth: Wukong	-20%	$47.99​	95.95%​	Aug-24​	1,374,942​	12,872​	2,415,714​
16		Schedule I	-30%	$13.99​	97.15%​	Mar-25​	216,082​	26,915​	459,075​
17		Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine 2	-40%	$35.99​	81.97%​	Sep-24​	306,755​	18,272​	225,690​

 

[Pifanjr]

It might be interesting to add whether the current sale is the lowest a game has gone for since release. Cyberpunk 2077 for example has never been discounted to $21 before.

 

[Johnway]

Hmmm... both interesting yet strangely predictable. Would have liked to see more indie games shine and making a load of sales. Glad to see stardew valley on there.

i would like cyberpunk, but my pc probably can't run it. So i'll wait till my next pc. Whenever that's going to happen.

 

[Zloth]

Civ 7 is down at number 104, just behind Satisfactory, despite getting top billing on the Steam sale page (at least for me). I'm getting really worried about Firaxis. Chimara squad, Midnight Suns, and now even Civilization 7.... Did Civ6 ever catch up to Civ5?? It's past time to "explore interesting new twists" and give people more of what they want, which is the same thing they did before. I've liked some of the new stuff, but they've got to pay the bills. It's been a bit like watching one of your favorite bans go experimental.

 

[Zed Clampet]

Civ 7 is down at number 104, just behind Satisfactory, despite getting top billing on the Steam sale page (at least for me). I'm getting really worried about Firaxis. Chimara squad, Midnight Suns, and now even Civilization 7.... Did Civ6 ever catch up to Civ5?? It's past time to "explore interesting new twists" and give people more of what they want, which is the same thing they did before. I've liked some of the new stuff, but they've got to pay the bills. It's been a bit like watching one of your favorite bans go experimental.

Civilization is on a bad course. They are following the path blazed by games like The Settlers, which is a terrible path to follow. This idea that developers must always radically change up the formula often leads to the de facto (or actual) end of a series. They may continue to make the games, but no one really cares.

I read a very long history of The Settlers and how every new game got worse and worse as they experimented with ways of changing up the formula. After every new game released, the fans complained that they wanted the old stuff back, but the developers continued to plow forward with innovations that no one wanted. Now the game is an afterthought. They still release a new one every now and then, but for whom?

Of course, Firaxis didn't help themselves any by releasing the game with what a lot of people were calling the most useless and incomplete UI they'd ever seen. Probably in the name of innovation.

 

[Colif]

I just didn't see the point of it, not here to start arguments

I removed it - I didn't mean to annoy you. Sorry about that.

 

[JCgames]

The only game in that list that interests me is bgiii

I bought guardians of the galaxy for 5 bucks and starwars outlaws for 35..
Had too grab it after watching andor season ii, the star wars bug has me good what an excelent show and the game isver solid too. I'm so very glad i bought it! Totally worth the wait.

Ps, it runs well at on my 10600, 1060 6gb, 64gb system and stable at about 28 fps, gonna oc to see if i can get it to 30 stable still its smooth at 1080p, especially seeing im on an under min requirments vid card so thats nice.

 

[Kaamos_Llama]

Civilization is on a bad course. They are following the path blazed by games like The Settlers, which is a terrible path to follow. This idea that developers must always radically change up the formula often leads to the de facto (or actual) end of a series. They may continue to make the games, but no one really cares.

I read a very long history of The Settlers and how every new game got worse and worse as they experimented with ways of changing up the formula. After every new game released, the fans complained that they wanted the old stuff back, but the developers continued to plow forward with innovations that no one wanted. Now the game is an afterthought. They still release a new one every now and then, but for whom?

Of course, Firaxis didn't help themselves any by releasing the game with what a lot of people were calling the most useless and incomplete UI they'd ever seen. Probably in the name of innovation.

Its a good point that innovation doesnt always lead to a good place, but with Civ every game has been slightly different than the last from the first to the last. I havent played 6 or 7 tbh but I do remember Brian pointing out this Sid Meier quote at one point, not sure if theyre still following this philosophy and maybe they just picked the wrong parts to change and people didnt like the new stuff. It's a fine line to walk if you dont want to get accused of a lack of innovation, because after 8 years between games a graphical update in 2025 isnt going to cut it.

Sid Meier:

“one-third traditional gameplay, one-third is improved from the last version, and one-third is brand new.”

Civ 7 is down at number 104, just behind Satisfactory, despite getting top billing on the Steam sale page (at least for me). I'm getting really worried about Firaxis. Chimara squad, Midnight Suns, and now even Civilization 7.... Did Civ6 ever catch up to Civ5?? It's past time to "explore interesting new twists" and give people more of what they want, which is the same thing they did before. I've liked some of the new stuff, but they've got to pay the bills. It's been a bit like watching one of your favorite bans go experimental.

Maybe its that theyve been trying to grab the interest of people who didnt play their games before? Not so much seeking to innovate as much as grow their audience. Seems to me thats what they did with Chimera Squad (which I thought was pretty good) and with the Marvel License for Midnight Suns. Most fans of Xcom would have much preferred to have seen a third mainline game in that series, but would it have sold much more than Xcom 2 and reached people outside of that wheelhouse and lead to improved sales?

 

[Zed Clampet]

Its a good point that innovation doesnt always lead to a good place, but with Civ every game has been slightly different than the last from the first to the last. I havent played 6 or 7 tbh but I do remember Brian pointing out this Sid Meier quote at one point, not sure if theyre still following this philosophy and maybe they just picked the wrong parts to change and people didnt like the new stuff. It's a fine line to walk if you dont want to get accused of a lack of innovation, because after 8 years between games a graphical update in 2025 isnt going to cut it.





Maybe its that theyve been trying to grab the interest of people who didnt play their games before? Not so much seeking to innovate as much as grow their audience. Seems to me thats what they did with Chimera Squad (which I thought was pretty good) and with the Marvel License for Midnight Suns. Most fans of Xcom would have much preferred to have seen a third mainline game in that series, but would it have sold much more than Xcom 2 and reached people outside of that wheelhouse and lead to improved sales?

As I see it, the problem with this philosophy is that every individual gamer will have their own short list of things that make a particular game fun to them. After you reach a certain point, if you are just innovating in a vacuum, you'll likely have removed a few things from nearly everyone's list. The question is were you listening enough to have changed the right things. You can either become better or just different, as The Settlers did.

 

[Zed Clampet]

Its a good point that innovation doesnt always lead to a good place, but with Civ every game has been slightly different than the last from the first to the last. I havent played 6 or 7 tbh but I do remember Brian pointing out this Sid Meier quote at one point, not sure if theyre still following this philosophy and maybe they just picked the wrong parts to change and people didnt like the new stuff. It's a fine line to walk if you dont want to get accused of a lack of innovation, because after 8 years between games a graphical update in 2025 isnt going to cut it.





Maybe its that theyve been trying to grab the interest of people who didnt play their games before? Not so much seeking to innovate as much as grow their audience. Seems to me thats what they did with Chimera Squad (which I thought was pretty good) and with the Marvel License for Midnight Suns. Most fans of Xcom would have much preferred to have seen a third mainline game in that series, but would it have sold much more than Xcom 2 and reached people outside of that wheelhouse and lead to improved sales?

I'll give you the only two examples from Civ that I can think of. I actually know quite a bit more about The Settlers' history (and it certainly isn't an exact match. The Settlers went down hill very quickly).

But one thing that was universally acclaimed about 5 were the graphics. So what did they do with 6? They went full retrograde.

And the driving factor behind all this innovation for years seems to be the developers concerns that people aren't finishing their campaigns. Many of their changes have been related to this. For instance, in 5 they put rules in place so that people would be more likely to stick to only a few cities.

But the shocking reality is that gamers, on average, don't care that they aren't finishing the games. They enjoy the early game and like to start over. Those of us who want to finish the game can. Everyone else is enjoying starting with a clean slate. There wasn't any need to make this the primary focus for the last how many ever years.

 

[Zed Clampet]

@Kaamos_Llama Also, it goes without saying, but I have no idea what I'm talking about

 

[Kaamos_Llama]

@Kaamos_Llama Also, it goes without saying, but I have no idea what I'm talking about

I wouldnt say I do either None of us know what the pressures and factors going on that cause these decisions to be made, but its interesting to talk about it anyway.

As I see it, the problem with this philosophy is that every individual gamer will have their own short list of things that make a particular game fun to them. After you reach a certain point, if you are just innovating in a vacuum, you'll likely have removed a few things from nearly everyone's list. The question is were you listening enough to have changed the right things. You can either become better or just different, as The Settlers did.

One point could be that rather than trying to innovate within the main line of a beloved series, especially one thats running out of steam is they could try out a new IP and really change things up. Again thats a fine line to tread and management or investors wouldnt be keen on any risk. They already kind of did do that with Midnight Suns and Chimera Squad, experimenting but balancing it out by attaching the experiments to well known IPs, I assume they thought at least Midnight Suns would do better than it did.

I think devs in general should be taking somethign similar to Obsidians recent approach. Lower the scope of things and plan for things to financially wipe their own noses rather than unrealistically aiming for 100 million player audiences to get shareholders excited. That way if you do strike gold and something breaks out you bank it all and expand on it with sequels once somethings proven to be popular. Once you run out of ideas for a series or it doesnt make money then branch out somewhere different or scale back. If these companies didnt have the pressure of always growing financially things would be much better.

Obviously thats out of the control of most places, and its the same old tune from me I know.

And the driving factor behind all this innovation for years seems to be the developers concerns that people aren't finishing their campaigns. Many of their changes have been related to this. For instance, in 5 they put rules in place so that people would be more likely to stick to only a few cities.

But the shocking reality is that gamers, on average, don't care that they aren't finishing the games. They enjoy the early game and like to start over. Those of us who want to finish the game can. Everyone else is enjoying starting with a clean slate. There wasn't any need to make this the primary focus for the last how many ever years.

Just been reading a couple of articles about it saying similar stuff from the devs side. I wonder if Civ 7 has turned a profit? I found estimates of 60-70 million in sales for Civ 7, and apparently Firaxis has hundreds of devs on the Civ team. Maybe its just got too bloated a project, Civ is massive but its got to be possible to make just as good 4x games as Civ with smaller teams.

 

[JCgames]

The thing is, what is the point of just remaking the same game over and over. Like civ V is vastly different than 4, and many that loved IV hated V. I loved 5 but 6 i barely played because there was something abour it that just didnt grab me. For the record i have not played 7 for the main reason i got enough backlog for years.

Crusader kings 2 was great and i played it for 1ks of hours, but i was super excited for 3 going in a whole new direction and i was really liking it. Then after 2 years they back tracked and its basically ck 2 with better graphics and it bores me to tear. Its become my biggest gaming regret purchase since buy everquest2, i even uninstalled the game despite having 1tb free!

Gal civ 2 w as great and i thought id like gc 3, but it didnt do it for me it felt like it was trying to be gc2 with better graphics but something was missing now gc4 has a new take and i cant wait to play it

Jurasic world evolution was great, 2 they chopped down the story and made better graphics but not much else but add dinos hard pass for me . 3 ill still have to wait and see.

My point is, dont just make the same game over and over do something different and give me a reason to play each, because each is good for thier own reasons.

I think the best example has to be starcraft 1 and 2 , very different but share enough for both to be great and worth playing, even today to bad i dont play rts any more...

 

[Zloth]

Well, you've got to do some innovation! We would still have "stacks of death" being the best tactic if everyone just stuck with the same thing. The second Master of Orion game gave us the first "end game crises," which is something many 4X games still have.

Some work, some don't, some work great for part of the fan base while annoying the others. There are even some that would have worked great if they were done as part of other games but fail because players expected something different.