Prefab house - yes or no?

For us, it quickly became clear that we did not want a masonry house. However, we also moved away from prefabricated houses. In the end, it became a house built with a timber frame construction from a local carpentry company. This way you are simply more flexible and don’t have to take all the so-called packages from the prefab provider. However, you also have to take care of all the trades yourself. But that varies. Carpentries are certainly more flexible if smaller changes come along. With prefabricated houses, this is probably more difficult because often all installations are already prepared in the walls.
Since we have an installation level, it is not the case that the airtightness layer is pierced. And you can already hang quite a bit on gypsum fiber boards. We simply find the material wood great. In terms of insulation, it is also better than masonry, with the same wall thickness. And the argument of living in plastic foil does not apply to us either. Wood fiber insulation is blown into the spaces between the studs. On the outside come wood fiber insulating boards. So no special waste like mineral wool, Styrofoam, etc. Above all, the sound and heat protection with heavy wood insulation is better.
The total construction time will not be much different. But when the house stands after 2-3 days and the windows are in, the house is sealed and you can do the interior work.
Of course, there are different construction methods for prefab houses, but I would not necessarily always compare prefab houses only with solid houses (there are also solid wood houses). I would not want a house wrapped in plastic insulation either. Also, an installation level is a must for me. Timber frame houses are often treated unfairly when labeled as prefab houses, even though there are often barely any differences because the basic construction is the same. I would still make a distinction between prefab houses and houses in timber frame construction (or wooden frame construction). Of course, there are also high-quality prefab houses, just as there are bad timber frame houses from local carpentries. But everyone has to decide that for themselves. That is my opinion.

@Peanuts:
- Soundproofing: There was an interesting thread about this here recently. With the same wall thickness, this is usually better (double-layered)!
- Fastening: Are you aware of what a small wood screw holds in an OSB board?

You seem to me to be wearing glasses with the motto "The building material I have chosen is the best in every respect."
Both building materials have advantages and disadvantages, and everyone has to weigh these against their personal preferences.
The two decisive advantages for us were:
- significantly better insulation values with the same wall thickness, as we have a rather narrow plot
- very subjective: I just like wood

Another advantage would certainly be that due to the lightweight construction, no load-bearing walls are necessary and thus, in my opinion, one is freer in design.

In my opinion, strange comparisons are being made here. In solid construction, the quality differences are just as wide as in timber frame construction. Calcium silicate brick is probably already a high quality, but there are just as many bricks mixed with carcinogenic hazardous waste from enamel processing. Or drywall panels made from pressed recycled paper including printer's ink.

Conversely, there is also timber frame construction without plastic foil or similar. That could then also be a buying argument for buyers: purely biological wall structure, purely mineral exterior plaster.

The discussion does not help further, you will find good and bad examples on both sides. I only noticed that nowadays buildings are often called solid construction (association: I am building myself a castle for 1,000 years), which upon closer inspection are qualitatively far behind this expectation.

A small addendum: On real estate portals for existing buildings, you can now find timber frame construction that is more expensive than "used" solid buildings in the same location. The notions mentioned above with price reductions etc. probably date back to the 1960s-80s.

I have to say something about this now, since we also live in a "prefabricated house" or timber frame house:

Possible problems with attaching heavy objects.

As already said here, that doesn't have to be the case: According to the manufacturer, our gypsum fiberboards can withstand at least 30kg of permanent load per screw, and our kitchen cabinets are attached with them, among other things. It often even has advantages compared to some solid constructions: I take the cordless screwdriver, screw in the screw, done. Depending on the construction method, others first need to have "heavy equipment" (e.g., hammer drill for concrete walls), find the right dowels and screws to attach something heavier.

- Every hole pierces the vapor barrier

Already mentioned: installation level, absolute must for me. By the way, in some cases, you can still make some changes afterwards, e.g., an additional lamp outlet vertically above an outlet .

- Soundproofing: There was an interesting thread here recently. With the same wall thickness, it is usually better (double boarded)!

We also had the wall between the bedroom and a child's room double boarded. Luckily we have the baby monitor, otherwise we would hardly hear the little one crying with the doors closed.

- significantly better insulation values with the same wall thickness, since we have a rather narrow plot

Same with us. With 31 cm thickness, we nearly reached Kfw55, but narrowly missed it only because of the basement.

That way you are more flexible and don't have to take all the so-called packages from the prefabricated house provider.

Actually, every prefabricated house provider not only has their catalog houses, but can also build freely planned houses. Our house was also designed by an architect. There is little difference, except that most work with wall grids that simplify production. For example, shifting walls in our case was possible in a 70 cm grid, anything else costs a surcharge. But since we have a wooden beam ceiling with this grid anyway, anything else would have looked awkward .

Another advantage would certainly be that due to the lightweight construction no load-bearing walls are necessary and thus, in my opinion, you have more freedom in design.

That is not true, we do have a few load-bearing walls. That hardly differs from solid construction; the whole structure is lighter, but it still has to be carried and supported the same way. At one point, a steel beam was even installed in our house to enable the room width and openness.

That is not correct, we do have a few load-bearing walls. This hardly differs from solid construction, the overall component is lighter, but it still has to be supported and braced just the same. In one spot, a steel beam was even installed to allow the room width and openness.

That is presumably different with every provider and depends on the wall structure. During planning, we were told that all interior walls are always the same thickness and are non-load-bearing and therefore freely movable in the same dimensions. But in the end, that only shows exactly what Traumfaenger already said: you can’t just generalize to "wood" or "stone"... within each type of construction there are numerous differences. Edit: We also have a steel beam in the open dining/living area. But that doesn't change anything about the interior wall itself.

buildings are often gladly referred to as solid (association: I’m building myself a castle for 1,000 years), which upon closer inspection are qualitatively far behind this expectation.

Just found a suitable post on high-quality SOLID construction.... The popular ETICS system there (just the word system alone deserves the golden raspberry). By comparison: timber frame construction with high energy efficiency and purely mineral exterior plaster, applied thickly, doesn’t have such problems. You don’t have to replaster every 2-3 years.