For once, I have to disagree! (This is good - discourse is growth :) )
Specifically about "You're the boss":
Note: I'm a big newbie on Splinterlands and haven't tried other blockchain games, so pardon my ignorance here
As far as I know, even if you're a HUGE player with giant wins, you don't really get a say in the development of the game itself, do you?
I mean, you could threaten to leave and remove a big player (yourself) from the game if they do things you disagree with, but in theory the same could be said for a professional e-gamer to leave LoL if he doesn't like some change in the game, too.
On the contrary, you could in theory become a shareholder in the devs of Call of Duty (cool fact I just learned - turns out that every other CoD game has a different dev - https://callofduty.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_Call_of_Duty_developers).
Realistically of course, your 10,000$ buy-in (assuming you're THAT invested) won't give you any real say on the direction of the company. Only the board of directors decides that stuff. But in theory if you're a millionaire you could buy up shares of the dev until you get a say.
Indie devs especially (but not only) listen to what their fandom says on forums. This is of course entirely dependent on company culture (menacing look at Blizzard), but is a known phenomenon.
So I guess what I mean is - isn't company culture and willingness to listen to fans more important than whether the game is on the blockchain or not?
P.S. Tagging 
RE: Only Blockchain games will exist in the future