Receiving a "Major Revision" After undergoing a "Minor Revision"
There are a lot of things you can do, but if you want the paper to be published by this journal, it is almost certainly necessary for you to undertake the major revision.
Refusing to  revise will almost certainly result in an immediate rejection, based on the editor comments.
You can withdraw the paper and submit it elsewhere as always.
I'll note that &quot;reviewer10&quot; might not mean the tenth actual review of your paper, but a nominal identifier. There may have been some reviewers invited, but who did not submit reviews, for example. I'll also note that it may be &quot;reviewer10&quot; with the most knowledge of the area, though that isn't necessarily so. In that case, the other reviews were too superficial. And the opposite may also be true, of course, with that reviewer having too little experience.
But the editor's comments are not to be ignored. You can do your own analysis about whether the comments of the reviewer have validity or not. If they say it is standard work with little innovation, then that should be possible to check. You could, of course, ask for evidence of those statements if it hasn't been included.