Story writing can be as much optional decoration as it can be the most impressive element central to a kind of game -- up to the very reason to make a good game. However, even if not of greatest importance to a particular game, a good backround writing elevates it as any other contribution. It is just so that competent writing based on serious study may be even less common in games than quality pixel art. And so, an unprofessional writing given prominent role can drag the experience down just as much. You want a good craftsman in that, just like you don't want your coder doing the art -- and often you don't want the coder to even judge your art. But given the good, a writer has many ways to improve and organize the project in more than literal story telling, but a unifying point of orientation, documentation and source of inspiration to the rest of the team's doing. And if a coder just happens to have put a lot of effort into text processing tools, a nice interactive "Choose your own adventure"-style story to show that off might be just the perfect fit.
However, after all, a computer game is first and foremost a software. If that doesn't work, you got no computer game, not even a bad one. And a software has a higher risk of not working, to the most useless result. It is for that reason that I think coders should be the most experienced developer on the team, fit for the given ambition, as usually these projects stand or -- by far most likely -- fall, with them. Coders must be responsible, for the sake of their fellow member's stakes. And that also means a special weight to the coder's word, so that word should be reasonably good.
While there are surprisingly often common principles among the crafts, every craft has its own challenges or conveniences. The reusability of a good code base is a strength of programming, while I am often impressed how fellow experienced artists can give in-depth critique fixing the problems, almost in an instant of looking at about any art, no matter how big the piece. Try that on just any bigger code project, no matter who you are. No. The owner of the code needs to know first what's what, and the computer game project is limited most directly by the competence of the coder in charge. Understanding this, you should fit the ambition of the project to the ability in this most carefully. It is a meaningful experience to finish and deliver your works, not just for personal satisfaction, but there is a lot to learn in that for your craft. Take it step by step to build yourself up. There's always a lot of fun waiting to be uncovered, no matter the scope.
If you want a first taste what games development is about, how coders, designers, graphics artists, musicians, writers, think and fit together, dip into the unprofessional scenes first for free. Modding or now game jams. Game jams are good getting into things, I believe. You don't over invest yourself to questionable outcomes, yet still have an opportunity to gain something. Meet people. Expose yourself to things. Look out for opportunities, as well as limit potential losses. Many high schoolers are just waiting to prove themselves on something. If you want reliable work in greater scopes, well, that costs money. Coders value their time as any artist should. Negotiating alternative shares involves a proven track record on delivered done deals for both parties, and/or a lot of personal sympathies. But trust is of utmost importance. Trust in character, as is in ability. A person can be nice, but can you trust your future into just about any nice person? Even the nicest person can be incredibly damaging to you when trust is broken, which breaks relationships. Know what person is worth what trust, to keep you and them well.