That USED to be true, but now- more and more- science has to investigate the TRUE nature of reality.

Yes, we evolved to process a Newtonian world - and that was 100% effective for understanding the universe up through the 19th century. If we continued at that level of technology we would be able to prosper without any problem relying on classical physics. That sort of physics is compatible with the brains we have evolved. Effectively - if we want to use the computer program analogy- classical physics is the Graphical User Interface for the universe- something that lets intelligent beings to interact with the program and get useful results. Without having to know anything about the source code and calculations being done under the hood.

But now, the 'objective' universe is no longer irrelevant to us, our investigations have us trying to understand the underlying source code, we are looking in detail at some of the blocks of code that make up some of the routines that work in the background to make the program work... we have learned a lot... but we are still only seeing snippets of code and trying to use that to infer broader things about the way the code is written...

We know that the concept of information is fundamental to the principles the program is based on.
Quantization makes sense as a way to simplify calculations... as I wrote below:

Well, for starters you would quantize everything at a scale that makes computation possible- we do this in simulations we do for mechanical design, Finite Element Analysis- you take a structure and break it up into tiny pieces for the purposes of calculation.

You would have to come up with a self consistent physics that operates in a quantized space-time, yet gives the illusion that everything is continuous when viewed at a large enough scale. We could call it ‘Quantum Physics’. While we are at it, (If we are really interested in creating simulated intelligences in this simulation) we could further simplify the computation immensely by not bothering to do detailed calculations on parts of the universe that are un-observed by those intelligences. Why simulate all the atoms under a rock on Mars if one of your intelligent beings in the simulation is not there to observe it? Just let such unobserved regions exist as vague probabilities that can be rendered in higher fidelity if and when they are observed.

If your simulated universe has only so much computational capacity per unit of volume, then if you cram too much matter in too small a volume you have a problem— so in that case why not handle such situations by walling off such dense collections of matter from the rest of the universe, and replace it by a simple object- like a black hole. No longer any need to simulate all the particles in that volume, since now no observers can see it. Just replace it by a simple object that is defined by a few variables like mass, charge and spin…

If you view spacetime as the 'processor', with only so much processing power per unit volume of space-time, then that may explain why- in the region around a dense assembly of matter- time slows down... the processor is struggling to keep up...

Information cannot travel faster than the speed of light- at least not information useful for intelligent beings- entanglement seems to allow instantaneous 'communication' between particles, but the code for that subroutine is carefully written to ensure we cannot use that for communicating faster than the speed of light.

All the variables in the initialization routine of the cosmos- the startup file-are exactly right for the development of intelligent life- with our current understanding of cosmology it seems that the odds that the variables would be so exactly perfect for us are mind-bogglingly low... yet here we are. (yes yes I know- OBVIOUSLY they have to be just right for us to be here pondering this question- but still, why are the rules such that it is so staggeringly improbable?)

IF its a simulation, then the fact that the variables are selected to allow for intelligent life to exist would seem to indicate that it was create for intelligent life, to enable intelligent life to study and explore the universe.

Theorists might be well served to at least consider the possibility that the universe is effectively a simulation and see if that leads to testable predictions...