Are abandoned Early Access games reportable?

Early Access could be such a great thing, if developers wouldn't abuse it to sell completely unfinished games.
"Hey, I made a main menu for a game I am maybe going to make... so... yeah. Buy it!"
Unfortunately the community doesn't understand early access as well, because they think that they will get a completely finished game which is as stupid as selling something not playable. Reviews are going to shit and the games are being abandoned. Steam doesn't care because they're always getting their share with minimum to no involvement.
Just think before you buy something. I didn't even know the games you mentioned in your post, so I would never buy them, but as long as they have trading cards people will still want those I guess...

i don't even buy EA (Early Access, i just wanted to specify as at first, for an odd reason , I though they meant like EA Electronic Arts) games anymore unless they're unique like Beseige. Most of them are alike, like there is too many MMO Suvivals, which i hate all of them as new players gets owned by Veterans/Hackers and there is rairly any difference, if there is it's minor. However that is my opinion.

Steam should remove them completely. It's a fucking online store for games, not a god damn kickstarter bis. If the dudes can't make a game then they should not put a title in the listing in the first game, and clearly not put a pricetag on it. All that is a pure scam anyway. Look at DayZ.

just dont buy cat in the bag, or how you tell it in english

early access will probably die in a few years like greenlight due to people abusing it. a pity because it was a great way for honest developers to finish a product, and some great titles have come out from it.
but as usual... bad guys spoil everything.

EA should change the name to TESTING and all the games should be discounted 90% or even free until the "final" release.

Another good example of a failed EA is Under the Ocean.

The thing is that some developers use the early access function into it's game's good (Rust, Kerbal Space Program, Unturned, etc.) while some developers abuse it and are causing negative side effects for those good developers.

Yes, Steam can and will remove abandoned EA titles from the store, the first example that comes to mind is The Stomping Land.

Games like that will keep appearing for as long as greedy and lazy developers exist, but the ultimate truth is that should stop gamers throwing their money at every such title before they have good reasons to, because they are the ones who are fueling this phenomenon.

I bought a few EA games and never had any problems with them, just be careful who you trust.

EA is a great opportunity for Indie developers, just because lots of people are abusing it doesn´t mean it needs to be removed, maybe tweak it.

And to answer OP, no they are not reportable.

Aside from the danger of them not being completed, there is one other possibility people seem to be forgetting about. Early Access (EA) is basically another way of saying alpha/beta release, and one thing that can happen in any pre-release title is that the devs may decide to take the game in a rather different direct, or make some other big changes that could turn a game you did like as it was, into something you hate. This is one of the reasons why it's always such a huge risk to jump into such things, and why it's safest to just avoid them outright.

Yeah the concept of Early Access has been very iffy, but obviously Steam will do nothing. They are making money. Steam has proven pretty conclusively in the last 2 years that they will put anything of even highly dubious quality out there and buyer beware, sadly.

I think the only Early Access game I am actually eager to try is 7 Days to Die right now. Anything else I am taking a "be very cautious" approach.

Every single game including Skyrim or DayZ or any other games, not just EA, is reportable. Yes, including Valve's own game. Not sure why dumb people say it is not.

There's a report function on Steam Store page (each game's page) for a freakin' reason.

EA was a bad idea, and so was Greenlight.

There's practically no incentive to finish anything when you can make a game with a fake trailer and promise a lot, give out free copies in return for Greenlight votes, take people's money, then abandon the project and start Towns 3.

To the people saying "Its the customer's fault" and pointing at the Early Access warning on the store pages :
I'm pretty sure it also says in the EULA that Valve reserve the right to terminate your account or any of it's content at their sole discretion. If you got shut down on without a good, rational reason, should we then conclude that because you agreed to the terms, it's your fault and that any discussion should be met with a snark about having not chosen to use a platform with a better reputation or terms?

I'm sure you realise this is a similar leap of logic. People who buy Early Access games KNOW there is a risk involved, but fixating on the consumer's responsibility for taking the risk in such a manner almost implies your are absolving the seller and/or developer of responsibility. Giving a dismissive wave of "your fault" is just a pointless deflection that ignores the underlying problem. Early Access games that are abandoned should be clearly marked in the store, and really there should be a more obvious chart of an Early Access game's progress.

Don't buy EA from unknown developers.
Don't buy EA from Double Fine
EA games over promising always under deliver
Only buy EA games when you're okay with the current content of the game.

If you follow these rules you will be safe.

How do you possibly prove that an early access game has been abandoned?

http://steamcommunity.com/groups/EarlyAccessGuidelines

http://steamcommunity.com/groups/EarlyAccessGuidelines#curation

Follow us as a Curator for potentially wallet healthy information.
Also, feel free to suggest additional titles.
Always looking to put the spotlight on projects that may misuse/abuse the platform and/or confer a higher risk of purchase.

This thread explains in a nutshell why crowdfunding is such a bad idea.

I know that a lot of entrepreneurs complain about laws regarding fund-raising, but, those laws are there for a reason. in the 1890's, a lot of "companies" were doing the same thing. Just going to random people asking for money, claiming they were going to put it toward some great business venture (which may or may not have started already). Some entrepreneurs succeeded, some made an honest attempt but failed to deliver, some did bare minimum to justify their claims/actions, and some were scammers who ran off with the money. Any of this sound familiar?

I thoroughly dislike the concept of crowdfunding and early access because the average person is in no position to make an informed decision. It's almost impossible for the average person to learn enough to know whether the project is viable, or the people are solid, let alone supervise them to ensure the job gets done properly.