No matter the hypothetical, and your point of view I still doubt that game owner will be more profitable than casino owners. You need to know that Casino owners have the right to accept or decline any offer given to them by game owners.
For me, casino owners and game owners are doing well in business, provided they are successful at it, and both have their challenges at the same time. You only looked at the possible challenge of a game owner but didn't look at the possible challenge of a casino, which makes it unfair. The way the casino owners can decline to use the software created by a game owner is the same way most casinos sort for game owners because they can't do without their games anymore, and even new casinos sort more for them to become well-established. So, this boils down to the success/failure of either of them if all conditions are weighed correctly.
That is both parties work hand in hand to give a better service. Anyone we choose is making money like the other but one must be making more than the other. Well we can not compare casino to game owners but considering the fact that there are many casinos now in the industry where most of them make use of the same casino games. This means the game owners make money from different casinos owners.
There is a problem though. Game owners can lose if there games are not needed anymore in a casino. But the casino cannot lose if they still have many users.