Can you humor us just this once, to remind us why we shouldn't care?
The Famitsu review format is the template that EGM based their review format on. Every issue there are 4 reviewers from a pool of available reviewers. Not always the same people. They are each given a tiny box to fix in a few sentences as a "review" with a number score.
A typical entry looks like this:
Reviewer Abe: The game is thrilling and exciting. I really feel the sense of adventure from the nice environments and high quality graphics. There is a lot to explore. There are things to do after you complete the game as well. 9.
As you can see, this isn't particularly informative. There is often nothing in a Famitsu review which you cannot already gather from previews or a trailer. It's just a short blurb about general impressions of the game. It's impossible to tell how much such a "reviewer" has played the actual game, or what their deep personal thoughts are on the game itself. Because there is nothing worthwhile in the text, people tend to fixate on the score instead.
But this is also pointless. Why? Let's assume that Famitsu is not corrupt, and there is no moneyhatting whatsoever. Let's say every single score is what the actual individual reviewer submits. So what? With such superficial reviews, a 40/40 would just mean that the luck of the draw that week picked four reviewers who decided that the game was a 10, and not a 9, or an 8. So what? If none of the reviewers have credibility, why does that matter?
On the other hand, we have actual evidence from people who have worked in the Japanese publishing industry and game publishers, that Famitsu is basically a weekly ad magazine. Not only do game publishers pay for actual ads, but they also pay for previews and coverage of their games. If you see a niche game get very tiny quarter page coverage from the mag, it is because the publisher could not afford to pay Famitsu to hype up the game more. If you see a game get a 8 page spread when it is announced, that is all paid for. It doesn't mean Famitsu felt that was a title of public interest which they had to report on. It is heavily implied, although never outright admitted, that Famitsu's review scores are filtered by their editors, and that the amount of previews and ads a certain game had bought in Famitsu has a direct link to the score it receives at the end.
The head editor of Famitsu himself has also admitted in an interview a few years back that he is basically unable to give a terrible review score to big titles. I cannot remember what his exact words were, but he was talking about how review scores have a big impact on even retailer orders in terms of initial shipments for games, and because of that factor, he feels that it would be socially irresponsible to give poor reviews which might have a significant impact on huge titles.
Considering all these facts. Why should anyone give a flying turd about Famitsu reviews? Seriously.