EDIT: Please only reply if you actually understand the overall point and to what I am elaborating upon in my post.

I'd like to elaborate on how most individuals potentially go down the wrong path prior to hearing about the simulation hypothesis. Keep in mind that this is only going by my interpretation and that there are many others.

My overall point being that when dealing with something as grand in scope as this, limitations are self-destructive/

Going by the simulation hypothesis, the very concept of conceptualising the creators / creator of our simulation and what power / machinery they may use to host it is a rather counterproductive way of looking at it since our only understanding of what is required to host said simulations comes from what we have witnessed within the simulation. To "them", creating something like our universe, and possibly may other universes / simulations could be as easy as it is for us to blink.

They could possibly not even be beings in the way that we perceive what is to exist in the first place, since our only evidence and proof of existence and its underlying mechanics comes solely from our experiences within the simulation.

Assuming that our simulated universe / world is even made up of code is again limiting the outcomes and probabilities as to what our creator most likely is by unfortunately being limited to the only mechanisms that we can understand, perceive and project existing only within the simulation.

Imagine the smartest Sim you can, that Sim could possibly question their reality and could even go as far as to test whether their concepts of it being simulated are in fact justified scientifically. They will however, never be able to know how the simulation works since, from their perspective they may be highly intelligent beings but to us they are nothing more than a random bunch pf pixels on a screen gathered together using whatever means we saw necessary to create their image. Furthermore that Sim is in no way a being to you than a stick man on a piece of paper is a highly useful and hard working member of our society.

The very concept and prospect of what something is, what a physical thing is and, or what makes up matter, and furthermore what matter is could possibly only be a product of our simulation and may not exist outside our simulation. I know that is a hard concept to get your head around, that everything has to be something right? Well no, everything we can perceive and that exists within our simulation is, but that however could only be the results of what ever parameters our simulation follows. To those who created our simulation or who are currently running it, the concept of physical matter could be something they added purely out of curiosity and they themselves could be made up of some form other pure energy. But calling them "energy" and saying that they are made up of anything is again counterproductive since those are the only options for existence that we are aware of, or are limited to within our simulation.

Imagining that anything "outside" our simulation in any way mirrors or resembles what is inside our simulation in any way possible is our only conceivable thought process since all we can know is all we can perceive and all that exists within the simulation.

I really do not wish to discuss religion here since that will most likely lead to arguing but I will admit that many simulation theories, and said simulation creators could hypothetically share all aspects and powers that most religions tend to associate with their chosen deity as having.

I'm not trying to put a downer on the subject, I'm simply elaborating on how large The Simulation hypothesis is in scale and what it truly could mean.

It is an annoyingly hard subject to fully conceptualise and requires a great deal of out of the box thinking. Well, out of the box that nothing, including yourself is or can be outside of.