I actually wonder a little if smurfs in a game like overwatch with a steep starting cost are tracked and treated special to keep that revenue stream.
Maybe things have changed, but up until recently Smurf detection usually didn't work all that well
This is why I think PvE is more sustainable for a player base and more conservatively solid as a business plan. WoW for instance.
But then by definition it isn't PvP and isn't going to get the same player base.
I think the future of PvE games is going to be in AI. If game developers could put a DeepMind-playing-StarCraft level of AI into games without immense cost, then it's going to change games quite a lot. It wouldn't be perfect, but you could have AI offer a challenge to players for longer without feeling unfair. (It's still AI that doesn't learn based on the player though, which means that the players would eventually figure out the puzzle of the AI.)
I think the immediate future is asymmetrical roles for humans.
For example, one side is playing FPS for a Kill/death ratio basically, the other side is a single person playing RTS for a win/loss ratio.
IE Mechwarrior team deathmatch. Team of multiple human FPS players against a single human MechCommander-with-basic-AI-team.
It'd give scenarios more flexibility and allow for human intelligence to combat the meta.
And allow the FPS people to get a 2 or 3 to one kill ratio.
of course the numbers don't work when you're exclusively playing against other people
this is why smurfing is so popular