I guess my point is that you add in the TT, you get other contenders choosing to race the Giro, not all the same type of only climber types. They are so equal because they are largely the same type of rider.
GTs traditionally have worked best when it is a battle between all-rounders and more pure climbers. This route only enticed pure climbers. As has been pointed out, even just having a second week TT would have made Almeida more of a threat to the others. And then the attacking would have, by necessity, been different.
For example, take Itzulia and P-N this year as examples of that type of fight. Think of the last stages of each. The purer climber(s) has to gamble more and attack from farther out and then we saw the defense by the all-rounder in each case, one successful, the other not quite but only by 20+ seconds and things were definitely in the balance until the, yes, drama of Remco finally being dropped for good on the last climb. Had Remco not been in play, then Martinez would not have pushed on as he would be only competing against similar type riders and would ride only defensively (very much like this Giro).
The Cycling Podcast has discussed this a lot and also brought up a debate between the two hosts, one preferring that “suspense” until the very end the other (Daniel Friebe) noting that traditionally people ultimately want to see at least that one exploit by the eventual winner so that they know that the winner is definitely the best - either a dominating TT or a mountain destruction of the opposition.
i definitely side with the latter myself. No matter who wins this Giro, I would have my doubts that they were indeed the strongest rider. And because there has been no dominant ride of any kind, it only accentuates the sense that we are watching second and even third-tier GC riders battle it out, whether that’s fair or not.