Eh. Maybe, but Go still has more moves. For example, there is something like 10 opening moves in Chess (8 pawns + 2 knights), with a 19x19 grid (standard rules), that's 361 opening moves. Sure, a 100 to 200 of those moves aren't the greatest (counter-meta), but it's still hundreds more moves than Chess.
You've just paraphrased exactly what I said. Number of possible moves creates the probability. There are 20 opening moves in chess. After each move, the number of possible moves increases (whereas in Go, the number of possible moves decreases with each move). After just 4 moves in chess (1 by each side), there are more than 250 billion possible positions. I don't know if 100 initial moves are really reasonable in Go, probably it is much less than this? But even if not, both chess and Go are practically infinite. One could imagine a contrived game with a much larger number of possible moves that isn't going to be more complex than these games.
As an example: someone created an abstract game called Arimaa that has 64,000,000 possible opening set-ups. This dwarfs Go. Is that game superior to Go (and chess), and more complex?
So using number of possible moves is a poor way to look at game complexity, or game superiority.