Why deviate from realistic visuals and create something that is visually less "cool"?

This discussion is inspired by this picture.

Ever since the first AC back in the days I wanted to see Northern European pagans versus crusaders. I guess Valhalla will be as close to that as it gets. I am also a HEMA practitioner and a viking-age enthusiast (enlivening history etc..).

So after seeing the trailer I felt bit let down. I don't get why they would deviate so much from more realistic look since realistic look looks so damn good on its own. And AC games have had quite nice look to them. I am glad I didn't see any horned helmets but visual team did take some unnecessary steps there. Armor looked unnatural, not fitting the period. Axes were way too intricate.

Sadly I don't know who edited this, but I would risk my neck saying that I am quite certain that no one would have thought the trailer any less cool if it were more realistic like in the picture there.

I hope the visual team is taking notes.

EDIT:

u/Baron012 reminded how Ubisoft removed crossbow from the first AC because it wasn't historically accurate. AC games start with "inspired by historical events and characters".

u/Attic0n compared to other historical eras that are portrayed accurately: "To anyone who's ever read a history book it's like seeing missile launchers and trench warfare in the Napoleonic era only everyone's wearing full plate and riding around on camels."

u/NativeEuropeas brought up Kingdom Come Deliverance which I had hoped would set bar for other devs too: "Honestly, after Kingdom Come: Deliverance's success which showed that entertainment (games&movies) can be both entertaining and historically accurate with some educational value as well, I'm surprised Ubisoft hasn't realized this yet and hasn't jumped on the bandwagon."