I like the simulation hypothesis. I love how it "explains" some of the constants we see & quantum physics.
I don't see how belief in "the multiverse" is any different than belief in a god or the simulation hypothesis. They all have zero evidence and can't be tested. The obvious question in all three is: what was there before? So they all have the same problems.
The simulation hypothesis actually becomes more likely, though still not proven, if we get to the point where we can run our own simulated universe.
We might also demonstrate that we were in a simulation if we found an exploit to take over the simulator's webcam (assuming the simulator didn't patch and revert). Universal buffer overflow!
I don't see how belief in "the multiverse" is any different than belief in a god or the simulation hypothesis. They all have zero evidence and can't be tested. The obvious question in all three is: what was there before? So they all have the same problems.