There's a spectrum of design decisions and GM judgement calls which separate different adventure structures. It's also vital to distinquish between different elements which must happen "no matter what".

For example: the sun moving across the sky, weather changing, day turning to night or spring turning to summer are in-universe eventualities. Traditional RPGs rarely give agency over these to players, but it would be folly to say a GM is railroading because time is passing.

An enemy finding the player characters, or player characters finding an enemy, are in-setting probabilities. Traditional RPGs give characters, and by extension, players a lot of agency over these. Hence when these things are placed in "must happen no matter what" category, it feels like a bigger violation of player agency.

There are games where these assumptions are toyed with. Sometimes, players are given considerable power to set the scene (time, place, weather), but what is going to happen and with who is turned into an in-game eventuality. (Even if it's not an in-setting eventuality.)

I would be much more fine with the latter sort of game if I could avoid the feeling that in such games, when and where are considered unimportant details, while who and what are stressed to the point where deviations from a game script are frowned upon.