"Modern languages like Java and C# may well be superior to old ones like Fortran, PL/I, and C, but they are far from perfect, and they could be much better. Their manuals of several hundred pages are an unmistakable symptom of their inadequacy. Engineers in industry, however, are rarely free from constraints. They supposedly they must be compatible with the rest of the world, and to deviate from established standards might be fatal."
https://www.inf.ethz.ch/personal/wirth/Miscellaneous/IEEE-An...
"In 1995 Sun Microsystems presented its language Java , fully 6 years after Oberon. It incorporated much of the "philosophy" of Oberon, but, alas, chose the style and syntax of C. Around 2000 Microsoft released its language C# as a strong competitor of Java, and Google followed in 2007 with its language Go, even more strongly following (the 18 years old) Oberon. The crux with these languages, which all became wide-spread due to strong industrial support, is their size and complexity. The ambition to provide everything to everybody prevailed and let them grow into complex bodies difficult to master."
https://www.inf.ethz.ch/personal/wirth/Miscellaneous/Compute...
Oberon-2, Concurrent Pascal, Active Oberon and Zonnon variants were designed by students or together with ETHZ fellow researchers.
Oberon is smaller than Modula-2, and Oberon-07 lost features on each language revision.
So from our point of view Go isn't complex.
From my point of view Go still lacks several features, which Go 2.0 will kind of address.
However, from Wirth's point of view, which after being retired was still trying to design such minimal language, Go is indeed complex.
You can see this by reading the language reports.
As Wirth languages fanboy, I belive that if Java 1.0 had AOT compilation from day one, instead of leaving it to commercial third parties, and proper value types, the amount of C and C++'s adoption would have looked much different.