the ratings for five nights at cancer is from edgy 10 year olds upvoting it
that's... not really how game ratings work?
first of all, over thousands and thousands of reviews, all from entirely different individuals, the effect of illegitimate reviews would diminish, and the "real" rating becomes more clear. ignoring entirely i guess the entire point of a review: write a positive one if you liked it, write a negative one if you didn't. unless you mean to say that the
widely spread high ratings are due to some kind of grand-scale practical joke instead, which is an idea i would find astounding to say the least
aside from that, you also have review systems that
aren't based on large-scale averaging of user reviews (which are arguably even more-so fallible for many reasons) like
steam curator recommendations (note: "Showing 1-10 of 1,480 results," all recommendations) or
metacritic's critic reviews. both platforms also, of course, have positive user ratings, presumably not from mass conspiracy.