Content or code?

As a solo developer, I have to divide my time between different game design roles. The most significant decision would be whether to work on coding  (new gameplay mechanics, more interactions, bug fixing...) or creating new content (more levels, better visual details, polish and effects...)

Normally, these tasks are divided between at least two people, so the code and content can be developed simultaneously instead of sequentially. Clearly this would allow the overall game development process to be faster, no?

I would argue not necessarily. This would indeed be the case if the developers are suitably experienced and generally know what they are doing, but might actually be detrimental if the team is made up of newbies. In the latter case, there would be a lot of wasted time correcting miscommunication, building and fixing assets that are not compatible with the requirements of the programming... etc

In what ways can solo developing be advantageous over an inexperienced team? Firstly, there would be no misunderstanding regarding what needs to be done to make the assets fit the code. Changes and iterations can be made much more quickly, reducing the time wasted going down blind alleys and rebuilding unsuitable assets. The solo developer should also be able to make big, fundamental changes faster. The larger the team, the harder it is to pivot to a new direction, which is sometimes needed, halfway through production.

Overall, I feel that team development is still the wiser way to get a mainstream commercial or less experimental project done. But the solo dev should not be pegged as totally disadvantaged.

I'm in the process of adding new gameplay and upgrading the content for my 5-year old mini-RPG CyberHeist. Stay tuned for a new developments.