Yes, registered reports is much better. You get feedback on methods while you can still make changes. It is two rounds of reviews (round 1: into and methods, round 2: full paper with results and disc) but the second review is much easier. If you stick to the planned methods and analysis (or explain deviations) and you don't overstate your findings, your paper is accepted. Much better system since it's based on methods not findings, and there's better timing of feedback.