I find the Simulation Hypothesis rather interesting. It instinctively feels uncovincing, but instinct is often not a good indicator of reality. If it did turn out we are all living in some kind of computer simulation, that means you could define the creator/programmer/designer of such a simulation as being "God". To my mind, of all the arguments for the possible existence of a God, this is easily the most reasonable and persuasive available. I wonder why more theists haven't lathed on to it.
Come to think of it, you could say that believing in God, and believing in the Simulation Hypothesis, are essentially the same thing. If God really did exist (on some so-called "higher reality" or whatever), then that would be logically equivalent to us being a simulation run by that God.
This does still lead to the obvious problem of "Who created the reality that God exists in?". Such a god would also not know whether they themselves were part of a yet lower level simulation, or whether they were at the fundamental level of reality. There could be an arbitrary number of level of realities, each with their "God" creators, none of whom know whether they are at the base, reality-level or not.
It doesn't really answer the fundamental question of how the ultimate, fundamental level of reality came about, so we are back to square one in that regard. But it's an interesting thing to think about nonetheless.