Legitimate survival

Look for consistency: explicit rules against dupes and hacked clients, a real report process, and a track record of investigating and fixing exploits instead of hand-waving them. Then check monetization. Cosmetics are fine; anything that sells power (crate gear, paid kits, spawners, paid currency that buys top items) undercuts the whole premise.

Usually, yes, but they stay conservative. Basic protections, chat moderation, and anti-lag measures are common. The red line is skipping survival friction: frequent free teleports, instant resource generation, or systems that replace mining, travel, and risk with a menu.

No. Legitimacy is about fair progression, not forcing PvP. On PvP worlds, fairness shows up as strong anti-cheat and rules that prevent abuse. On PvE-leaning worlds, it shows up in resource access and economy integrity: no dupes, no pay-to-win, no privileged gear pipelines.

They can be. Claims are often the difference between a long-running world and a wipe from grief. In legitimate survival, claims tend to be scoped to protecting builds, not locking down huge areas to control farms, biomes, or rare resources.

You will be behind the biggest projects, but the catch-up path is straightforward because progression is stable. Villagers for enchants, iron and food stability, a safe nether route, then an elytra run when you are ready. Player shops and trading usually help you gear up without being handed free power.