So, here's the thing. I have this setting I've been working on for years now. And the setting ended up with almost 5000 years of extensive lore, and you need to be familiar with several different philosophies and cultures to understand any of it. I was trying to come up with some names for characters in a story I am writing in said setting. And when I was researching how names and languages change I was struck with a thought. Am I overcomplicating this? Do I really need an explanation why there is a guy named "Al Banian" and why the name is actually a remnant from a completely different reality? I'm getting to the point where the lore is so complex it starts to sound stupid if you don't know all the details. Case and point, a guy named "Al Banian".
Another example. There are several creation myths, and three of them are technically correct.
I need some advice. Feel free to ask questions.
You are definitely being creative in a roundabout way, but once you have all that work done, you can theoretically tell almost any kind of story within that setting.
I have been doing this in a very minor way (compared to you) in creating a D&D world so that I can step in at any point in history with an adventure and have the players version of the world change through their cumulative adventures.
I don't have 5000 years of detailed world history or even a completed world map yet, but I am having fun and so are my players.
So to tie all this up, you are doing this for you and having fun with it. Why stop now? Write your stories. Maybe find an audience.
More or less though that writing process is similar to Tolkein's. Make the setting well enough and the characters will suddenly start to make their own decisions for you. (And then you rethink earlier decisions when you get better at it and need to retcon things.)
I wouldn't say my setting is as detailed as real life history, but you can step in at any point from 1977 to around 7000 and there's always something major happening in the world. There's always gotta be a driver for world events. So, once you establish that, things tend to happen organically.
I usually treat all conflict as originating from different opinions and points of view. This scales from inter-personal drama to cultures, religions, countries and races. This is both a boon and a curse, since I know the motivations and backgrounds of all characters, I see how superficial and stupid the conflicts between them are. What saves me there is that the reader doesn't know, so they won't notice. Once you start seeing it, you notice that there is no actual reason for armed conflict at an international scale. Like, not ever.
And the worst part is writing characters. Not as in creating them, but writing good dialogue. Despite all my efforts, it still seems (to me) like every person is just the same guy wearing different clothes. I desperately need to talk to other humans (to learn how they speak to one another).