You have several possible designs. 1. competitive (Starcraft, DOTA, LOL, CS:GO, etc.) 2. low skill ceiling (usually thanks to significant randomness - see Hear

You have several possible designs. 1. competitive (Starcraft, DOTA, LOL, CS:GO, etc.) 2. low skill ceiling (usually thanks to significant randomness - see Hearthstone) 3. no skill-based matchmaking (for example in Warthunder AFAIK matchmaking is based on the vehicles you drive not on how often you win your games) 4. party games (you play with the same people repeatedly - see Among Us) Option 1 discourages casuals, but makes for games with high engagement. People still play starcraft 1 broodwar and age of empires 2. Option 2 is best suited for casual/mobile/pay2win market. It can work for the game developer, but I consider it a dark design pattern aimed at extracting the maximum amount of money from addicted people (usually kids). Option 3 is weird - people don't care about winning games in Warthunder, they only care about killing enough enemies to get virtual money to repair and upgrade their tanks. It's also heavily pay2win because the best vehicles for their matchmaking rating can be only bought with real money. But few people care about winning so I guess that's fine? Also it's not mainly marketed to kids so I'm more ok with it. Option 4 is the best because anything with friends is fun. But you have to have friends who are into it. Among Us took of recently after years of barely surviving (probably thanks to the quarantine). But most multiplayer games that do well for years after the release are highly competitive. I don't think that's an accident.