All of these regions had people living in them for thousands of years, yet not all of them had the widely known and advanced (for their time) civilizations. The Citadel of Aleppo in Syria was built in 5,000 years ago in Europe, and lots of castles from 1,000 C.E. are still standing. The Pyramids of Egypt were built around the same time Temple of Karnak was built about 1,000 years later.
Looking at just the past 1,000 years, there are tons of castles standing in Europe, the Forbidden City and similar in China, Machu Picchu in the 15th century, etc. These trends just do not seem to follow in regions such as Southern Africa and North America. Dont get me wrong, they all have recorded civilizations and structures that have existed just as long, but they just didnt seem to be as advanced for a very long time. Most of the oldest structures in the USA exist in southern parts are from south american civilizations, even though Native Americans lives here for over 10,000 years.
One can blame the cold in North America for slowing down advancement but Europe and northern parts of Asia had tough winters as well and were still able to advance. Then you have Egypt which has the same climate as most of Africa yet they advanced much more than most of the rest of the continent. Why?
Questions like this are relatively often asked on this subreddit, but because it's such a big sprawling question, there's lots to unpack, and typically things have different reasons in different parts of the world - history is too complex for there to be one answer. That said,
/u/PartyMoses looks at the differences between 'civilizations' of the Americas and those of Europe during the time colonisation had to happen. /u/Bronegan also unpacked the idea of 'advance' here. /u/restricteddata broadens the scope to talk about why 'civilization' happened at all, as far as historians can tell. Hope that helps!