As Baruch Spinoza argued, "one imagines they're free because they are aware of their own desires whilst being ignorant of the causes that determine them."

The development of disciplines such as neuro-marketing, sociology, linguistics, neurosciences etc. should bring us to this metaphysical question.

A good counter-argument would be the seemingly random nature of radioactive decay observed on a small sample. On large scales, it's fairly easy to observe an exponential law but it's, as of today, impossible to predict whether an atom will undergo radioactive decay on its own. 

Gases appear to work in a similar way. It's very easy to study gases through statistics approximations, but if one wants to study individual gas particles, their movement becomes very quickly impossible to compute as the number of gaseous particles increases. Fluid mechanics are a very computer-intensive field of knowledge but as of today, this is a quantitative problem due to exponentially growing complexity and chaos theory. This is the basic distinction between questions of computability and determinism.

Rephrased different: could anything in the history of the universe have done differently? Including human history, that is assuming the human mind is also a deterministic process, albeit extremely complex and able of self-reconfiguration.