We can actually get a pretty good idea from looking at the spectral emissions, at least which environments are likely to be more common.
On ptable.com [0] you can compare the abundance of elements in a human to the abundance on Earth, meteors, the solar system, and the universe. It seems like despite an abundance of aluminum, silicon, iron, and titanium, relatively trace amounts are found in humans (a typical animal), and most heavier elements are not needed at all and are actively toxic.
The more versatile, modular, lightweight elements are very highly represented in humans. There's a reason organic chemistry is its own field -- those "more elementary" elements are simply more unique than heavier ones. At the top of the periodic table where the nuclei have small masses and closer orbitals, the relative impact of unfilled orbitals is much more significant. The standard reduction potential of Lithium (element no. 3) is a prime example of why it is so uniquely dominant for battery chemistry.
I agree with you that our universe is a big place and a lot could happen, but my point is that attractor states exist and I would expect orders of magnitude more life to be based on organic chemistry, and probably even similar amino acids / a DNA double helix than not. Those lighter elements also tend to be more common elements throughout the universe, so the amount of planets where life with some inferior chemistry based on germanium (everything would be much heavier for the same reactivity patterns as an organic compound) would be limited to planets where there is a ton of germanium and not much carbon or silicon, which would be very rare (although it would be awesome to see what would happen!).
[0] https://ptable.com/?lang=en#Properties/Abundance/Human