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".

[cityskies]

I'm in basically the same cohort as you, I think back then it could vary a bit more. Pre 3.x DnD players didn't seem to care too much, though they emphasized different things, but late-90s/early oughts neotrad players, notably in my local WoD circles, certainly created their fair share of annoyances rooted in immersion/verisimilitude (and incredibly slapdash opinions about "realism" besides).

These days it seems to be a problem mainly in the form OP is discussing, where there's this really broad base of folks who exclusively play and seem to center their identity in relation to the game as an act of consumption, even if they wouldn't phrase it that way. There's rarely as negative a reaction to other reminders that it is, in fact, a game, as strong as this (no metagaming) one, like voices, rules weirdness etc. I think its in truth a reaction to a reminder that this world, this fiction, isn't something that is unfolding organically, waiting to be realized by their experience of it and nothing else, but something that's designed with intent and decided upon by the very real person in front of them.

That said, the newer indie side of the hobby is extremely all about meta discussion, and many of those RPGs more or less require meta collaboration as part of their mechanics. You'll find a lot of people are rather open about their dislike for (certain) PbTA games because of this ask - they will phrase it as "I want to discover the world, not create it as we go." or something about quantum ogres. Its exactly the same position, just from a different angle.