Languages and purchase sources included
The request explicitly used all languages, all purchase sources, and all review types. The selected filter was all. This scope explains what population the summary covers and should stay attached to the numbers whenever they are quoted.
Returned text and total counts differ
The request asked for one review body through num_per_page=1. That limit applies to returned review text, not the totals in the API summary. It does not mean only one review exists, nor does it provide enough collected review text to identify widespread opinions about mechanics or bugs.
How the positive share was calculated
The percentage is 1,304 divided by 1,760, rounded to one decimal place. Both positive and negative counts belong to the same API response. Pairing one of these totals with a percentage from a different store page would create a measurement that the source never returned.
The separate storefront snapshot
Another collected Steam storefront showed 1,651 reviews and 73% positive. That observation has its own page context and must remain separate. The reason for the difference in filters, caching, or timing is 待确认 — to be confirmed, so this page does not reconcile the two by guessing.
What reading the rating cannot establish
A positive percentage does not establish performance on a particular PC, a tested fishing route, or a manager fix. The saved totals also do not identify the most common review themes. Those claims remain 待确认 — to be confirmed without the corresponding tests or a complete analysis of review text.
Where to continue
The official Steam store is the verified destination for reading the current product information and reviews. Our singular review page places this historical rating alongside confirmed game features and PC requirements. Neither page claims a first-hand score, later patch result, or a current review total beyond the saved October 1 evidence.