Why Cars scored 7.0 and this scored 4.5? Because Cars is better, period.
It went the right direction, but it does almost everything wrong.
Graphics are a mix between cartoon and realism, and it came up very near the awfull level.
Playability is almost broken: target system is a joke, camera isn't "smart" it is rather retarded, it sometimes simples forget what it is supposed to be looking at (it's Superman, follow Superman, you idiot camera!); missions are so repetitive, just lame excuses to reach some bosses, which, some are okish to fight; the story starts so-so but soon colapses into nothing but meaningless epuisodes until the apoteotic (read as shallow as possible) finale.
A very positive word to the soudtrack (not in-game, though) which would fit a much better game, it is very good.
It has some "historical value" I guess, but it is a very shallow game.
note: the title is meant to express my surprise how some fellow gamers praise this software and ask why Cars had a better score - Cars is in fact a much better game. But I guess why kids say this Cars is meant to be for little kids and they are just "kids". Well you'll grow up soon and realise that games are games, some are better and some are worse, it's not an age thing.