I'm so sorry if my comments made you think it's a mistake to refer to your plant as a Dracaena. Since that's the name "they" have given it at the moment, it's the technically correct thing to call it, according to them. I guess I didn't make it clear that I and most other people who have expressed an opinion about it that I've read object to the renaming. Since "they" don't care what "we" think, it doesn't do any good to object, but I still do just to put the objection on the record, so to speak.
Could we see some more pics of the plant from different angles? My first impression was that it's individual leaves, but Rick's comments make me wonder if it's just the angle of the existing pics.
Cultivar variegation is any appearance other than this basic form, the plain species. This is the plain species.
The younger leaves are a much lighter color and develop the deeper green as they age &/or fade.
A grand old, always-inside plant will look like this
Not sure how this was propagated, but it's another reversions away from the cultivar (non-plain) pattern
This plant looks like the older, original leaves had more distinct pattern, then some faded and darker looking leaves grow while it was taken inside for winter, then brought back outside and the increased light yielded some more distinction on the newer leaves.
Also sorry because I realize that we're focusing on the cause of why the new rosette doesn't have the same pattern. If it isn't just fading from low light, it can be ameliorated by unpotting, removing the parts that don't have the preferred pattern, and repotting just the desired parts. There are no guarantees that it won't make more "plain" leaves in the future after that, but that is the standard remedy to try to preserve the variegated parts of plants that are trying to revert to plain.