I would think that it would deserve a rent at the least by someone who would like this type of game. For me, it looks cool, but not the type of game that I would enjoy.

Ugh, why do people only post the numbers with no source and just assume everyone cares only about the numbers? -_-

Link for the review in case anyone cares:
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/103/1032352p1.html

So this game has been in development since 2005/6 and that's what they offer?

• seven minute install
• horrible initial load every time you start the game (2 minutes)
• long time to save (1 minute 12 seconds)
• horrible textures
• bad animations
• horrible controls
• no voices what-so-ever
• car clips through the ground
• despite being on the plains of Africa, it's incredibly closed off
• couldn't be more boring.

Ouch.

im still getting it, i dont think its a game or anything. just a relaxing muck about lol.

I've played it and I would actually recommend it if you like breaks from normality in gaming.

Seems a bit harsch.

Weren't some people on the forums boasting Afrika as a graphical masterpiece for a while. With claims of millions of grass rendered individually? is it true then that the grass is just a flat texture? While I can't comment on the gameplay it seems that graphically this game didn't meet the original expected results.

It would have been better received if it came to the rest of the world when it was released.

The game is ancient now so the scores do make sense however still harsh.

Thank you IGN.

This game looks and has looked horrible ever since it was first shown. The graphics aren't nearly as good as people like to make them out to be, and the game looks extremely dull, boring, and not replayable at all. I have no idea why so many people were saying this would be a good game. I couldn't figure it out then, and I'll never figure out those who still defend it.