Yep. And remember this isn't real life. This is art. Movies don't use realistic lighting because generally speaking it's boring. They add lights where they're impossible and contradict the scene, in order to make something that looks better. In this game, without some adjustment to depth, the end result looks like a graphic novel. It's pretty awesome, but it would be better to have some distance adjustment IMO. That doesn't mean blurring the background completely out. The fact developers are over-using DOF the same as they've overused bloom doesn't make DOF an innately bad thing. A very subtle blur would be very good in many cases. And without blur, some hazing would be good. Again, the artists shouldn't overdo it. Too much can be as bad as too little, but a small touch would be welcome.
I see, my apologies from the misunderstanding.
Though, I do think if they did add hazing to distinguish depth, that a lot of people would cite that as a technical short coming and 'fog' lol.
But I see what you're saying now. I just absolutely HATE the use of DOF right now with next generation games. It's done so poorly and out of taste, just 'tossed in' because it's 'easy to do' for the current generation of games.
Even then though, atmospheric haze is something that generally doesn't become visable for about 25 miles or so right?