A crucial argument favoring deliberation is that it produces better decisions. This aspect is vindicated by deliberation allowing one to gather, select, and transfer relevant information when facing an issue. For this reason, deliberative experiments are a fascinating feature of contemporary societies and feed the hope for deliberative governance. In this article, I argue that well-grounded arguments vindicate this hope, but that deliberation alone, even if it transforms people's views and improves their level of information and competence, does not guarantee better decision-making considering complexity. The value of information can indeed be negative in a complex system. Therefore, I argue that the problem of the competence of a decision-making center should be side-stepped, to focus on the the institutional structure able to cope with complexity, i.e., polycentric institutions allowing experiments and learning.