Of course! It's called boycotting :P
I simply don't want to rent games with DRM, expecially if they're crappy expensive titles with microtransactions.

I simply can't download the massive forced updates, I can't use steam. And I tend to think most of the best games are older ones anyway.

That's how I feel about Blizzard's post-Warcraft 3 games too. I am a huge fan of Blizzard's games, from Warcraft II through all Warcraft, Diablo, Starcraft games up to Warcraft 3. World of Warcraft looks like an amazing game, and they more or less defeated piracy for all intents with that game, but the nature of it being an MMO in my mind meant I had to hand it to them that it was a legitimate business model and that they couldn't make a game like that and have it be the same /without/ doing it the way they did. So I look at that one perhaps a little different than other people who would just say it is pure DRM. My reason for not wanting to touch WoW though was the subscription model. Sometimes I game for hours day in day out for several weeks in a row, then I might go for days/weeks/months or even a year without playing many or even any games at all. Paying for WoW would mean that I had to schedule time to play the game to feel I was remotely getting my money's worth, or risk paying for it and not playing it and wasting money. Plus, at $20/month it wouldn't take long for that to be the most expensive game ever in the history of gaming, especially if it was that good.

So, I have completely panned WoW and will never play it. But then Blizzard did some online-only modern anti-consumer DRM on Starcraft II and Diablo III, so that pretty much put me off from ever buying their games again. My friends have hounded me for years to buy Starcraft II and join them on multiplayer, and later on also with Diablo III. I decided that there is no way in hell I'd ever pay Blizzard and support that level of anti-consumer DRM and be aware I was doing it. I'm not opposed to their gaming client or platform, just the anti-consumer features present. Told my buddy several times the only way I'd play Starcraft II is if someone else who wanted me to play it bad enough gave me a copy for free, and there's no other way I'd ever play it. It took 2 years but finally he wanted me to play bad enough that he bought the game for me, and I've played it and love it. Now he's bugging me to buy the expansion packs thinking that I "got over my anti-Blizzard" spell. But I'm not anti-Blizzard, I just wont pay money knowingly for strong anti-consumer DRM or software practices and I refuse to change my mind about that. So he'll be buying me the expansions if he wants me to play them, and if not I'm happy to just play the base game or play one of the 900 other games I own on GOG+Steam instead.

So, I pretty much live what you just said, only substituting Steam to Blizzard, Ubisoft, EA, Rockstar and Warner Brothers (my existing dead-to-me list) excepting free legal copies of their games that fall from the sky into my hands more or less. I'll use their platforms (I also have Origin and Uplay <barf>, but only free games on them both), but I wont buy anything from them directly or indirectly.

If every game coming out starting tomorrow and onward globally on every single distribution platform had ridiculous anti-consumer DRM on it, I would stop buying games completely and I could live for 30-40 years comfortably playing all of the 900+ games I own already and never look back.

It's not really that hard not to play games on Steam. PC games have existed and been available long before Steam showed up. I have been happy playing without Steam, and I will continue to enjoy my games without Steam.

Such an impressive backlog and you have Alien Breed + Tower Assault on your wishlist? I think that was more shocking than seeing all your owned games.

That's pretty much me, too. There's so much choice in games nowadays that even missing out on Steam exclusives doesn't make a difference to me whatsoever. Besides, what others have said about low-innovation AAA titles. With many of them, what's there to miss?

Once I am lock out of my games for two weeks and stuck with steam support who don't know a thing. They just give generic answers and suggest things that I already mention I did in the first post.

Then it hit me. I am renting my games instead of owning them.

As a result my non steam games is a few times that of steam, on GoG alone my games number 1200+ I cannot finish them all in my lifetime already.

I don't need to rent any new games from steam.

Wait, wait, wait. You're actually saying that "boycotting" a thing does not mean "jump on the thing bandwagon as soon as humanly possible"? I'm confused now.

Lol.
Btw, I must confess that, recently, due to GOG Connect, I.. redeemed 1 free game (Limbo) on Steam XD

Those GOGers who would rob themselves of playing some Steam-only games by not using Steam are using Steam, they just not advertise it so much. Simple as that.

Personally I am not using Steam, because those "99,9%" of PC games - as you put it - consist mostly from the last AAA titles that are usually "too flashy, too short, too reaction-driven, too big and too resource-heavy" for my tastes on the one side, and tons of derivative "shovelware" on the another. Besides, I don't need my games fresh from the oven.

But I actually have a Steam account.
Probably. I didn't bother install it on the new computer 2 years ago.
But I still have it.
With 6 games on it.
And around 300 titles from GOG catalogue, NOT counting games bought directly from the developers.
So it goes.

I think I have more games on GOG than steam. And except bundles I don't really buy games on steam... I have a large enough backlog, and only a handful of new games interest me that aren't here.

How did you arrive at such a number with one decimal percent point precision? My guess is your estimation is way off and is not even an estimation, but an exaggeration.

I do have Steam, but I only have 14 games on it. (And the vast majority of those came from bundles).

But I simply don't care about AAA games, which is where most of the Steam exclusive issues come from. I mostly play old games, which I can get here. And indie games, which if they aren't here are frequently available as direct downloads from the designer's website.

I don't have the same issues with Steam on principle that some have. But it's very rare they have anything to offer me that I can't get elsewhere, without DRM.

Yes, but if they have lots to play regardless (without Steam), then it doesn't really matter, does it? I guess your question is somewhat similar as asking "how can someone who enjoys movies possibly not watch any Hollywood movies?", yet lots of people in the world never do, and there's plenty to watch without watching Hollywood movies.

It is also similar as playing only PC games, and not console games (PS4, XBoxOne, whatever is the latest Nintendo toy called...). By doing so, there are plenty of (console-exclusive) games you'll be missing, especially the Nintendo stuff like MAAAAAARIO. Does it matter? Maybe not, if you have lots of interesting games regardless.

I have hundreds of games on Steam (and lots more on GOG.com), but for a very long time I've used Steam only for playing Team Fortress 2 (which is a free-to-play multiplayer shooter). All my other gaming has been for non-Steam games for a long time, not because I try to avoid Steam, but because I don't need to use Steam (besides for TF2). Simple.

I am sure though I will use Steam in the future for playing some of the other games I have there (Dark Souls, the Batman games etc.), but that's somewhere in the future when I am not playing something else. After all, there's a practical limit how many games I can play at the same time.