People keep on bringing up the idea that the characters in Rogue One are worse than those of TFA, but I think that these movies present two very different ways to create a character. In the case of TFA, the characters for the most part are larger than life, all of them at least idealized, at most mythologized. Everything they do is part of a larger destiny, and they cannot die in vain. Even Han Solo’s death was played on a huge, dramatically lit stage surrounded by other figures of destiny who will surely avenge him.
Contrast this with the characters of Rogue One, who are often subdued, restrained, ordinary. They are not figures of destiny, and even the one who has genuinely magical powers is treated as no more important in the story than the grunts in the Rebellion. It is the story of everyday people coming together to achieve a goal that will be largely unsung in the annals of history and overshadowed by the achievements of Chosen Ones.
To say that one interpretation of character is better than another is to misunderstand how TFA and Rogue One are fundamentally different movies. One is about heroes of destiny, the other about people acting heroically.
I think even with the story and tone they had there still could have been more character development for the characters that were underdeveloped and character development period for characters who aren’t developed at all. TFA had more things to balance and still was able to pull off having most of our new characters be layered. Even if someone like Jyn just had more personality it would go along way.