Sure; which is why I acknowledged that as a problem. But unless we disconnect everything or return to the days of purely episodic adventures, either approach is going to have its share of problems. I'd rather choose the one that lets authors' stories play out without interruption, as I feel that will make for the stronger reading experience overall, but your mileage may vary.
In this case, though, we're not sure now, and won't be until current storylines wrap up, what exactly DC's looser take on continuity will mean. Does it imply that everything will line up into a neat timeline when each serialized arc is done? Maybe, and that does come with the risk of diminishing tension if you can figure out where things align before the story's done. Or is it truly going to be loose, in a way that Johns' book could have consequences that affect Superman even if the details never exactly line up, or in a way in which consequences continue to play out in Johns' book and never worry about lining up with the solo books? (The obstacle there being that individual titles read really well, but putting the universe as a whole in order is sacrificed.)
Who knows? I guess we'll find out as we move on. I agree that DC can do more to make its stance clear to readers. but all of these are simply problems that come with the unnatural storytelling form of a shared, serialized universe. In the meantime, try to move forward without expectations for how everything will line up, and see which stories grab you on their own.
Basically, go ahead and assume Darkseid War could still have consequences right now. There's nothing telling us it can't, except the idea of holding to a neat timeline DC itself may not subscribe to anymore.