Free-For-Alls Can Be Good, Actually

I have long opposed free-for-alls in games that involve attacking other players. I would rather have two teams. If the game has player elimination, free-for-alls mean some players have to wait for it to finish. Targeted attacks are also inherently weak in games with more than two players. If you don't properly incentivize them, players will stay on the sidelines while their opponents burn resources. Free-for-alls can also lead to politicking, which can be bad but can also be great for game balance.

Though I am not normally into FPS games, I recently decided to give Wardogs a try. Its economy intrigued me. I bounced off it because of its slow pace, but I noticed how well the three-team setup worked. Most team shooters I know have two teams. With three teams, whenever one gets ahead, the other two naturally push back. This matters when the game involves reinforcing positions. The lead team may have a defensive advantage, but their opponents outnumber them 2-to-1.

This dynamic works well for an intentionally slow-paced game like Wardogs. That doesn't mean it is automatically good for any multiplayer free-for-all. I have had terrible experiences with 3-player Santorini and 5-player Zombies!!! precisely because getting ahead is impossible. Compared to Wardogs, I see two features that make all the difference.

First, free-for-alls are frustrating when you want the game to end. In Wardogs, you don't actually care about ending the match. Your real motivation is earning money to progress. True to the mercenary theme, winning the match is just what you were "hired" to do. If the 2v1 dynamic stretches things out, that creates more opportunities to make bank.

Second, free-for-alls are frustrating when they can destroy progress. All progress in Wardogs is permanent. Even if another team takes control of the center from you, your team keeps the points you accumulated. In Santorini and Zombies!!!, tearing down the lead player also resets their progress.

If you are designing a free-for-all, make sure that progress can't be taken away. The game's dynamics will naturally counter a lead, and this grows with the number of teams. As long as you preserve progress, free-for-all dynamics are great for maintaining tension.