Ok, let's make it simple: I don't like Steam. There are more games on GOG that I could play in a lifetime. The End.

If all you want to play is indie games, sure.

Otherwise, you absolutely are not allowing yourself to play most of the interesting games that come out on PC.

Because not everyone is as picky as you. Another valid answer is:

300+ and growing. Yeah, there really is no reason for Steam if you don’t want to use it, because the market is so supersaturated that there is no shortage of DRM-free games. And since I only play single-player, the GOG forum is all the community features I need.

Edit: Still, I’m sometimes sad about certain games (that I would love to play) not getting a DRM-free release. But I will not give in. One of the best ways to get more DRM-free games is to only buy DRM-free games and show developers and publishers that they will get more money if they also provide a DRM-free build. More and more publishers joining GOG and releasing their new and old games here is testimony that it seems to work.

My tuppence worth.
I don't like DRM, but I don't absolutely abhor it like I abhor racism.
It's not a necessary evil like tomatoes (you get tomato ketchup from those squishy, gooshy things). DRM shouldn't exist like that whole breatharian diet fad. DRM is just daft, to my mind.
But, there are all sorts of opinions in the world, and one school has seen fit to sell renting games as a form of purchase.

With that in mind, I utilise Steam as a convenient (maybe "convenient" isn't the right word - "lazy"?) way to keep my games in one place. My rental games, that is. I regard anything on my Steam account as a rental - yes, Steam states that you're purchasing games, but you're in actuality purchasing a license to play the game. You don't own it.
Yes, the rental is for the lifetime of that particular account, but it is still a rental. I get to play some games that aren't being released DRM-free, but they aren't mine.

I have over a thousand games on Steam, because I populate it with game keys bought from bundles, and because I'm a lot less discerning about what I choose to put in it. There are quite a few games that I'm sure that if I actually got round to playing, I'd be rage-quitting in a few minutes just because it's so crap. But it's in the library because it was bundled with something I really did like the look of, and the description sounded mildly appealing. My requirements for adding a game to Steam are pretty much a 10% chance I'd like it. Because, they're not really my games, I don't keep the place as neat and tidy and clean.

Now my GOG library on the other hand has a high(er) bar. There has to be an 80% chance of it being worthwhile my time to play it. This is my personal library of games, and I'm very picky. Of course, I'd love the opportunity to actually buy some of the games that are in my Steam library on GOG, but I'm also fine with GOG's policy of curating the games they choose to add to their catalogue. No Bad Rats, thank you! (And yes, I know mistakes have been made of both sides with dreck games making it through, and quality games not. Hopefully, the quality games' decisions will be rethought with hindsight, as with Jonathan Blow.)

I don't intend to add any more game clients. Steam is more than enough, thank you. However much I may look with longing at monopoly games on uPlay or Origin or Blizzard etc., as others have stated, my GOG backlog alone is probably enough to keep me enjoyably gaming for the rest of my life.

Steam isn't necessary in my opinion for a modern gamer unless that gamer is really into e-sports and MMO games. You need other people to play multi-player games. With such a large client base, Steam has positioned itself very well to take advantage of that undeniable fact. If like me, you're Noddy No-Friends and IRL you're a recluse, single-player games being totally up your street, well you absolutely don't need Steam and all of those social network overlay stuff.

:)

Great band, though I thought "Out of Time" was a little overrated.

Yeah, over time I lost a lot of my enthusiasm for Losing My Religion, although it might be just fatigue of having heard it too many times. I still do love Nightswimming, What's the Frequency Kenneth? and Bad Day.

If anything is going to put folks off of steam, it will be steam itself.

It took a couple of years of someone going on & on about steam before I tried it. I still don`t see the point of having to use a client, especially bloatware, to then run a game. Why not just let us run the game itself.

Bad enough when GOG had to remove ARMA games because of Gamespy being shut down, then I had my standalone & GOG versions forced to steam if I ever wanted to play them again.

steam will constantly "patch" things that are of absolutely zero use to me. Music player? Already got one. VR? Don`t & never will have one. Security patch....We`ll see about that later & not mention it in the mean time.

Also, when I`m playing something like Magicka Wizard Wars, which runs on Paradix servers. If steam servers go down, even just the community part, then that also kicks everyone of us out of M:WW games.

Same for "maintenance". It`ll kick us, despite we`re playing on different servers completely.

steam sales? Meh! GOG, GMG & others are more often cheaper than steam are.

steam support? HAHAHAHAHA! People get banned, closed accounts etc & can wait years in the hope of anything ever happening.
Just look at last year, when anyone checking their profiles/steam pages etc, could also see other folks & their wallet funds & emails etc. Did steam ever say anything? Did they fuck!

Then there is the spy ware. Sure, if you need to know that someone`s system can handle a game that they are trying to refund, just tell them they should`ve checked in the first place.

Oh also... I have updates/news turned off, because it never tells me anything, yet other night I got a huge pop up whilst in game (luckily only in lobby).

But then again, whilst Origin is less bloatware, they are just as stupid with some things...

Uplay with the ability to stop anyone playing single player because their servers were busy..

Elite Dangerous, whilst originally planned to have single player-offline, that got removed. Now any time servers or internot struggles, no games for you, oh nope.

DRM should kill itself!

I had a Steam Account but I don't use it since years now.

Yes, Steam has some benefits like new games and the Steam Workshop. For the achievements I don't care but some may.

But on the other hand Steam restricts your consumer rights by binding the games to their client which is in fact an intrusion software which collects data and lets valve even remote control your PC. You don't even own your game you only rent it and Valve has the power to even ban you from playing a game. Thats for me too much violation of privatesphere.

It's the question if the benefits outweigh the bad things for you. For me not.

Regarding the always new games on Steam, I don't really care of because there are many older games with a much better gameplay than the mainstreamed new games. I don't look on the graphics. The actual gameplay is the way more important for me.

Oh, man, I hate that song. I used to rent a basement suite long before I met my wife and the landlords got drunk one night, passed out, and had that song on repeat. I think I must have heard it close to 30 times before I was finally able to get one of them to wake up, open their door, and turn the damned thing off.

All good tunes.

I'm sure you came up with that '99.9%' figure after extensive and careful research. =P

More seriously, I have to question the premise of your post. You titled the topic 'How can PC gamers NOT use Steam in 2016?', but if anything, I would say that going predominantly (or even entirely) without Steam is much more viable today than it was a few years ago.

Sure, there are still a good number of games, particularly multiplayer and Japanese titles, that can only be played using Steamworks, so for anyone who generally avoids Steam, there is still some degree of sacrifice involved. But more titles than ever before are seeing DRM-free releases as developers/publishers have increasingly come to realise that: a) piracy isn't and never has been as big of a deal as they thought it was and b) their risk is better managed by releasing on as many storefronts as possible, especially after Steam's 'dumpster truck' approach to releases has undermined any advertising value such a release might have had in the past.

Even when it comes to titles that are initially Steam-only, unless there is a specific reason why they can't see a release elsewhere, chances are that they will be made available eventually. And in an age of frequent discounts and massive backlogs, unless you absolutely have to play the game at or near launch, it makes an increasing amount of sense to just wait. At the end of the day, GOG users in particular are aware of the fact that a good game doesn't stop being good just because of age. Combined with GOG's efforts to improve online features and make multiplayer releases easier, the situation with new DRM-free releases is only set to get even better.

So yeah, I don't think the situation is quite as bleak for those who forego Steam as you might imply. That said, speaking for myself, I don't forego Steam and Origin entirely, just mostly. On PC, I primarily purchase games on GOG (I have about 400 titles), though I occasionally purchase some physical copies (either at retail or second hand) as well. On Steam, I have something like 25 games; most of those are either retail copies I had to register on Steam or I received for free, either as a gift from a friend or from a giveaway. I primarily use it and Origin for the occasional multiplayer title that I play.

I will admit that, in my case, what helps reduce my dependence on Steam is: a) my preference for single-player games b) my general distaste for most newer games and c) the fact that I supplement my PC gaming with console/handheld titles as well, though even there, I primarily play older games.

No?

Only a tiny subset of games I was interested in in the last years was a Steam exclusive. "Homeworld Remaster" was one...but luckily the remaster was/is awefull, so no loss... It became then available on GOG when a patch arised trying to address most of mess ups. So, a good wait. The "Banner Saga 2" was released very fast on GOG too...the developers identified their audience quickly (PS: someone has infos about sell numbers here?). ;) I'm a patient gamer... this is OK.

You say you don't want to start a GoG vs Steam nonsense, but as you probably know the road to hell (or to nonsense in this case) is paved with good intentions. In your case, using an obviously misguided/false argument is where you are losing some points in the ''I don't want to upset people'' area.

I know other people have pointed that out already. But you are lucky ;)

Because at the end of the day, most PC gamers want to play games...period. Whether that's Skyrim, GTA, Doom, Fallout 4, Civilization, Dark Souls, etc etc etc. A lot of these games are not available DRM-Free and probably never will be. Also keep in mind that most people tolerate Steam because Steam has not prevented them from playing games. A lot of those disenfranchised by Valve are due to the fact they've been locked out of their library by some reason or another.