Oh I'm sure there will be a few, seems to be the case for a lot of popular games. You'll have a few clickbait "reviews".
Every non top of the rating scale review for "nerd" culture stuff has these accusations right at the top of the comments. People who haven't seen the movie or played the game saying someone who has just gave the score to get clicks and ruin the metacritic.
Not impossible mind you, but almost always posted without reading any of the text.
That Civil War review I posted in the movie thread has that all over it (along with the even better "BvS sucked", "DC fans are so pathetic", "someone should find his past reviews", etc.) and the review basically starts off saying that it's the first Marvel film he hasn't fully loved and how it's still way better than BvS.

Tom Chick reviews of console fan boy games are always fun because Metacritic interprets his scores as 20-40-60-80-100 and so people click through from their F5ing of Metacritic to a site/author they have no knowledge of.
Not saying there aren't those type of people out there (though they often seem to be going the other way, boosting stuff considered mostly garbage) but just commenting on how it seems that it's not possible for someone to actually dislike the things you do, but that they instead must have some kind of sinister motive. Bathing in group think hype building (WITH NO SPOILERS) leads to some real insanity when the real world encroaches.
I almost wish I could create an alternative universe GAF just to read the threads as the GameFan, EGM and GamePro reviews of 16-bit games roll out.