I don't want to surpress it, I just won't play any games that force me to use it. If it works out being superior to Steam and makes it worth the switch, I'll switch. For me, it's use one or the other, not use both, because that's just a waste. But I don't want a system for buying games that requires me to have several different tools downloaded. I'd rather just have the one and stick to it. If any games require me to install uPlay, Games for Windows Live or origin or any future alternatives, then I will boycott those games, unless I desperately want that game. Assassin's Creed III for example (a Ubisoft game) should to my mind be available on UPlay and Steam, if it isn't, then it's a case of Ubisoft forcing people to use their software, rather than users choose what's best. By all means, include an advertisement and heck, even an installer and convince people UPlay is better. But I think it'd be an unfair move should they make it a requirement, like it is with Valve games (which by similar right, I'd hope to see sold elsewhere with the option to not use Steam). To be honest, I don't think PC gamers like being messed around as it is.
If, however, I am using UPlay anyway and if for some reason I deemed it better than Steam, then I wouldn't boycott, because it'd make no difference to me as I'd already have UPlay installed.
