No, you pretty much nailed it.
Alright, it's generally accepted that the OT is better than the PT in most aspects, right? Let's use that as our working concept. The OT is better than the PT.
There's a lot of reasons why, but they're better summarised elsewhere. What's relevant to this thread is the creative process behind the OT as opposed to the creative process behind the PT.
During the OT, the original scripts were written and rewritten numerous times to make sure the films were as good as they could be. Technology was designed and redesigned to fit this. Lines were changed, often on the spur of the moment. Essentially, the OT's entire creative process was about that central Star Wars narrative, and it evolved through its development. The result was the Star Wars setting, but the process
wasn't the Star Wars setting, if you catch my drift.
The PT wasn't about creating a good story. It was about being Star Wars. It was about conforming to that setting and being linked to that original story. Not that you couldn't have done it well, but it would be better treated as a stand-alone story that links
to the OT rather than a cinematic shrine at the feet of those original films. Adherence to the setting of a story that came beforehand shot the PT in the foot. It's almost entirely contextualised by the OT.
For instance, the Jedi. In the OT, we learn what the Jedi are with Luke Skywalker. As he comes to terms with his powers and gains new knowledge, we become more informed, catching glimpses of what it was to be a Jedi. Not just through literal power, either, but in terms of the moral and spiritual values associated with the Order. In the PT, we're introduced to Jedi through two men in robes who almost immediately pull out lightsabers and go apeshit on hapless droids.
Why? Because the PT thought the setting did the work for it, when it didn't. It's the story that does the work, and that's where the OT excels.