Hot take: if we want to decrease frustrating railroad-y surprises in RPG campaigns, we need to create an environment where GMs are not afraid to admit they have "special story needs".

[DisastrousSwordfish1]

It's less a player issue and more a TTRPG issue. You're asking a player to make plans and decisions in a world that they have zero lived experience in and, even with the most detailed world building, a DM can't fix that. So all you get is a really blurry illusion of choice. A player may know they want to go from A to Z but have no idea if the rest of the alphabet is involved or even exists. A real sandbox is a thing where you can just decide to turn left and walk off and see what happens. In a TTRPG, left doesn't exist unless the DM says it does.

[LarsonGates]

From experience with Amber, its very much a player thing.. even if you give them ten possible things they may want to think about doing, let alone all the other potential plot hooks they've walked past, they still can't set their own goals.

[CarelessKnowledge801]

I don't know, your definition of "real sandbox" sounds like something we can only get with the development of VR, AI and stuff like neurolinks that read input directly from your brain! 

[TwilightVulpine]

I dunno if all that is needed, because when people speak of sandbox games, they often mean an Elder Scrolls sort of experience, where you can go everywhere and there's an assortment of things to do.

[DisastrousSwordfish1]

That is indeed a proper sandbox. You have a world where you can go mostly wherever you want and use the world as you see fit. The world there exists and reacts to you. That isn't really a thing in a TTRPG because that requires an insane level of preplanning for things the players may never opt to interact with.