If you were an actor, would you prefer artistic or blockbuster movies?

Artistic movies, no doubt at all! In an artistic drama, the actor is the star, is the center of attention, and is able to steer the production to some extent. In a big blockbuster tentpole film, the special effects team is the star, the center of production, and steers the production... while the actor stands in front of a green screen and tries to pretend there's something to react to.

Of course all actors want the odd tentpole extravaganza on their resume because it looks good to have a big hit, but they really want to make small personal films that are all closeups of themselves.

some do blockbusters in order to get smaller films made.

I think you just try to do good work. There's a lot of bad arthouse films and blockbuster doesn't mean bad. You try your best to assess a script but movies are a crapshoot.

Blockbusters, hands down
Lots of money, maybe get to play a superhero, have actual tough stuntmen do my stunts so I look like the toughguy😎

I recall Robert Downey Jr being asked if he'd rather win an Oscar or star in a #1 box office movie, and he chose the #1 box office movie.

Both. I would do films that interested me and that I would watch. I might even do a cheesy horror movie just because it would probably be fun to make. Money is nice, but it's even better when you can have fun making it.

I might carve out a career like Sir Patrick Stewart, balancing the big money roles with more personal artistic endeavors as he describes here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IURfntimnlA

I bet most would say both.

If you're making blockbusters, you've always got the option of doing the occasional lower budgeted more artistic sort of movie. A lot of A-listers will do that.