As others have said, selling OTM options naked is like picking up pennies in front of a freight train.
You can win 99% of the time and make pennys for every dollar people may take home betting directly on the underyling instead, but once in a while, one bad trade can take back all those and more.
Selling options naked OTM limits your gains, but you potentially have significant losses. So it is asymmetric P&L profile.
That said, selling naked options has its advantages too. You can pick price levels that are further out, allowing a margin of error and still make money.
E.g. you are originally bullish on AAPL anyway. You can either buy 100 shares outright, or you can sell a put naked 3% away from underlying at the time. If AAPL stays flat or goes up your gains are limited, no harm no foul. If AAPL drops 2% by expiration, thats great because you just made money anyway even though AAPL fell a bit. But, if AAPL tanks 20%, you will be down massively. However, had you purchased the 100 shares instead, you would also have been down massively like everyone else, and you wouldn't have collected a premium or be at a lower price of entry. So selling that OTM put was still beneficial, so long as it fits with your original thesis of that investment. In this case, it means you lost less overall than had you just purchased 100 shares.
While the statistics of options sellers winning percentage wise may be correct, it does not address the payout. If you factor in payout, its possible primarily options sellers don't actually gain that much over the long term, if at all, because it only takes one or two bad trades for the market to take back everything.
That said, its basically insurance. The insurance industry makes a lot of money every day of every year selling insurance premiums to everyone else who buys it. Rarely do people do claims so overall its been profitable for them.
