It's edited, he used a different font. :)

Yeah, after a second look I see now.

I was announced months ago.
Not a Sierra game. No Al Lowe involvement. Doesn't look good or feel like a Larry game.

True, it applies everywhere.

I'll agree with what you say, they do shape stereotypes and such and you're right on the propaganda/agenda bit; maybe it just doesn't affect me as a personality in a way that i'd argue with said game's/movie's/book's creator, i mean, even if a cultural product (as you describe it nicely) isn't on par with my beliefs/view of the society, i'll just take for whatever it is or maybe even avoid it rather than trying to convince someone about how wrong i believe it's creator is or anything like that.

I wouldn't really describe the artwork as "tumblrified". Just bland. It looks like any other generic cartoon drawn with a vector art program.

Believe me, I hate Tumblr-style artwork as much as you do, but this is far from most eye-searing garbage to come from CalArts (which is to say, not Wandersong). The colors aren't overly obnoxious, there's some actual shading and variation in line width, nobody has that fucking jelly bean mouth, etc. It really doesn't look that different from what you'd see in German cartoon games from about 10 - 15 years ago.

Yeah. I wouldn't describe the original games as being master-classes in video game art direction, but the disrepency in character designs between Larry and the other characters had meaning. It was a deliberate choice by the artists to visually denote what a dork he is before he even opens his mouth. I get the sense that this game's art team doesn't really care much for the previous games. The way they talk about choosing to homogenize the visuals, as if it's a good thing, makes me unhappy.

The originals are pretty tame by today's stnadrds for computer games, but in the 1980's there were pretty damn risqué.
But you have ap oint in that with Al Lowe the main source of humor was Larry's incompetence when it came to women which had certain charm to it. The more recent games, because they can't pull that off without Loew's involvement, have upped the sex factor to try to make up for it, and failed.
I think that Larry, more then many PComputer game charecters is stuck in his time,and is probably better left there. But as long as someone thinks there is a buck to be made, it won't happen.

The irony here is that in the 80s some things were shocking, but nobody got offended.
These days almost nothing is shocking, but everybody tries to feel offended.

I hope this does well. It great to see franchises from back in the day stick around.

This might be more possible:

https://www.mobygames.com/game/leisure-suit-larrys-casino

It gets five stars for the grossest title of any game.

I would be interested if it was made by Al Lowe, but since it's a European creation by some random team and Al has no involvement, this goes to the same bin as Magna Cum Laude.

Thankfully.

although the game seems to have one big problem - Larry 7 had better artstyle than this one.

Its art, art is suposed to be shocking, Contreversial, Disgusting, nice, Offensive, dreamy, Propagandic, Agendic, or any other term you can trhow at it. The intent of the artist is to provoke something from the aduience and you will not get Art that is restricted in a little box with invented borders so somone can feel safe. Art in its nature is free. You cant control the minds of people. Countless dictators have tried and failed.

If a large group is using art in a longer span of time forexample the goverment then i agree with you. Thats proaganda or an agenda.

Add intention. Propaganda is a deliberate attempt to impact the worldviews of people. In order to impose an ideology (when it's in order to impose a consumption habit, it's advertisement, and yes, both are related in many ways).

But when masses of people produce art that convey an ideology "accidentally" (because all art does), simply by illustrating the shared "common sense" of the artists and of their sociocultural background, it functions like propaganda without being deliberate propaganda. It's ideological (it conveys values), it's massive (it's commonplace so the ideological content is invisible because it's "common sense" within that culture, but it's one tree hiding the forest), and it's barely conscious at all (the artist is seldom aware of conveying a message, he just naturally re-uses moral and elements that he considers going without saying). And all cultures are made of that. And all the good and the bad within one culture is reproduced through that.

And when people (of any side) realise it, they use the word "propaganda" as a (deliberately shocking) derogative term to point out the effects of these mass productions, conflating deliberate intent with indifference or unawareness. And cultural content (glorified norms, values, models) that you disagree with becomes "propaganda" in a "culture war", whatever the intent of the authors. And sometimes whatever the content of the art itself (overinterpretation, scapegoating, etc).

So, just adding this third (biggest) category. Between individual artistic expression on one side and calculated mass propaganda on the other. Most heated arguments are about this third inbetween category, defined by quantity, normality (often meaning elephant-in-the-room invisibility), and lack of conscious intentionality.

Youre mixing art and comerecials/art used in Ads/comercials.
Yes art used in this way have an agenda and this is to sell more stuff of a product to earn more money.
its not really the artist thats making the money but people with an agenda in this case selling more products.
The company behind the product hiring the artist to make the comercial.
Art accidentitly being the same is not really pushing an agenda or propaganda
it may however describe the current society in some parts of the world or it migth describe a setting in a fantasy world Aka the witcher/blade runner/Game of trhones
If a game comes out of some of the arbic/muslim cultures then its a pretty big chance the society rules are diffrent and as a result you will have art that reflects that, however that does not mean you will not have people pushing Boundaries in Art in those parts of the world.
Also, even if the theme is the same, Forexample Offensive sexuality, it does not mean the art is the same
You will have subtile differences. Some migth draw it in a cartoon style, other migth use other styles.
And Personality of the artist also plays a role

Thats why an orginal of one of the great painters are more worth than simple copy.
Also adding they also have to have some degree of renown.
If no one knows about the artist then their works arent worth that much.
So even if an artist do produce offensive sexual stuff there is no garuntee he will earn alot of money.
Its the same with youtube. Even if you upload stuff on there, there is no garuntee that you will be a hit among the masses.
Theres countless artist that earn next to nothing even if they dabble in the art forms that makes the most money.
So acusing artists or art to have an agenda or some propaganda is a bit unfair i think.

The Only agendas they will have is to make money for themself or to try making it or to Increase fame
but this is a bit strange to acuse them for
no one works for free longer periods of time, even artists got to eat and pay the bills.
And if you acuse artists for making money or trying to, then you have to acuse the rest of the people that works in other feilds that are making alot of money. Doctors, pilots, Oil, etc.
When it comes to fame, well beeing more known can help you get a better Job or better paid for the same Job.