A realistic interpretation is one in which there is no reference to an external context in which our world appears. A simulation, by definition, makes reference to at least another level of reality beyond what we can measure directly. A realistic interpretation, by the contrary, has no necessary reference to any further reality. We may argue that any realistic interpretation can be included in a non-realistic interpretation, by the addition of at least one level of further reality. Likewise we may argue that any non-realistic interpretation may be simplified into a realistic one. And we may also argue that any of these two transformations should be done. That is, that any realistic interpretation, by being incomplete, calls for some sort of metaphysical context in which the visible world arises, or, by the contrary, that any metaphysical explanation, because it is unwarranted, should be simplified, or cut down by Occam's razor, in order to be transformed into a realistic explanation.
Of course, both of these arguments stem from a concern of completeness versus certainty, where non-realistic explanations aim for the more comprehensive hypothesis and realistic explanations aim for the more certain hypothesis.
Here we will explore realistic interpretations.