Having an identifiable style is generally good, if you want to stand out. However, it will draw some in and drive others away, for the simple reason that we all have different tastes. I think as an artist, it is often important to define yourself with a strong sense of identity, however, there is then the danger of getting stale, either for viewers are as an artist. Many of the best photographic artists have a strong underlying style, but either constantly develop it with slight adjustments, while others almost go through a change of identity, just to keep it fresh. The latter has its own dangers, as you could alienate fans. It's a bit like a music artist suddenly completely changing the style of music they perform. As hobbyists, there are also two angles, you can either try lots of different things to stop you getting bored or you can relish the challenge of developing your style.
Ultimately, it is down to who you want to impress or if you care about impressing anyone, other than pleasing yourself. If you are only in it to please yourself, then a strong style probably doesn't matter that much. If you are trying to attract models for TF or if you have clients, then it is also important to impress your target audience. If you want to keep a wide appeal and have lots of traffic, then an individual style is less important
In terms of the images you have posted in the original post, I would say that your strongest images are the indoor ones (and that is coming from someone who prefers the great outdoors). They are well executed, with strong, dynamic lighting. They aren't necessarily something that I would normally be drawn to, but I do like the way you have made use of the lighting and this is what makes them stronger than the outdoor images. They have a sense of drama, but I wouldn't necessarily think they were by a specific photographer, even though they do have a common theme, with strong lighting and some with narrow depth of field.