This study investigates how the layout and structure of battle arenas in a melee-driven multiplayer split-screen game influence player engagement. By iterating on two arenas, making informed design decisions based on data from weekly playtests. Data collection involved observations, interviews, and an automated C# data-collecting tool. Metrics focused on social interaction, success, participation, and area interaction, linked to enjoyment, immersion, and level of interaction. We conducted six playtests with eleven arena iterations. Key findings include a player preference for arenas where they experienced higher success rates, either through hit accuracy or wins; excessive spatial restrictions leading to player frustration and decreased enjoyment due to mobility difficulties; and a general preference for asymmetrical arenas, which were favored for their varied gameplay and strategic opportunities, despite slightly lower active combat participation. The final arena design was asymmetrical, featuring four distinct zones, each providing unique gameplay experiences and strategic opportunities. This study highlights how arena design can enhance player engagement by balancing spatial dynamics and strategic elements.