That's because you're viewing "20" as a concrete, absolute suggestion and not simply a hyperbolic hypothetical. I wanted a number that would be more choices than any single character was ever given, and I'm pretty sure that list of response to "What can change the nature of a man" is the longest string of choice in any game ever.
I'm using 20 in the same hyperbolic sense that you are. I explicitly stated that I'm skeptical that we'll see anything that goes significantly beyond what we saw in the games of the 90s, because there was little that was restricting those games from having more choices than they did when comparing it to Fargo's project.
And yeah, the response to Ravel is probably the longest string of choice in any game ever. It's done because the sequence needed to stress that you could literally say
anything to Ravel. All she cared about is what YOUR answer was, whatever it was, and that is not portrayed as clearly when you have fewer dialogue options. In the end, it all led to the same result in the conversation though.
If you're expecting more situations where fluff responses exist that serve no functional difference in how the conversation/plot proceeds, and exist simply for pure roleplaying (i.e. I want a hostile response because ants are in my pants, as well as I want a hostile response because someone peed in my cornflakes), I think you're setting your sights a little high for the same reasons that it didn't happen in the other old school style games that WL2 is a throwback to. It's only going to be jarring if it isn't consistently done, and it's going to cause writer fatigue as they spend time coming up with additional dialogue responses for the player responses that have limited function. All the while understanding that time spent writing this is time NOT spent writing other content.
I'm fine to agree to disagree, but I'm skeptical that extra responses purely for roleplay will exist in a meaningful way.
