I've been playing the game and was thinking last night that statement is (to me) an anachronism: it made sense in the first game where it was clearly dealing with the Middle East and choices made for the sake of a more playable game may have come across as culturally insensitive and started problems online. It felt a lot less likely people in the current world would be upset at or read deeply into the depictions of old Norse and Saxons, but it looks like I was wrong.

I would suggest, as the author seems to propose but not allow, many of the issues are there for the sake of game play: I am currently using a flail and questioning my choice every time I get whacked because the thing takes a week and a half to pull start. But it's the strongest one-handed weapon currently available to me. So it makes for interesting tradeoffs in a way "axe v sword" might not.

A similar case could be made for fudging the details about sexual equality among the old Norse. I doubt anyone is watching the game imagining Vikings were tender and considerate self-reflective modern males; it just makes the story flow better than having to watch a cut scene of 10 dudes throwing food at each other in conference.