This question already has an answer here:
I have been reading through a Wired article on pilot wave theory which talks about new evidence in support of Louis de Broglie's concept of pilot theory through experiments showing that the droplet in a double slit experiment goes through one slit and the pilot wave going through both.
In the article, physicists are quoted saying things like
“I think the experiments are very clever and mind-expanding, ... but they take you only a few steps along what would have to be a very long road, going from a hypothetical classical underlying theory to the successful use of quantum mechanics as we know it.” - Frank Wilczek, a professor of physics at MIT and a Nobel laureate
“This really is a very striking and visible manifestation of the pilot-wave phenomenon ... It’s mind-blowing — but it’s not going to replace actual quantum mechanics anytime soon.” - Seth Lloyd, a quantum physicist at MIT
The article goes on to talk about how pilot theory is
"more cumbersome than standard quantum mechanics. Some researchers said that the theory has trouble dealing with identical particles, and that it becomes unwieldy when describing multiparticle interactions. They also claimed that it combines less elegantly with special relativity."
Looking into it some myself, it seems that one of the reasons why everyone is not on board is that the pilot wave interpretation gives up locality.
So, what obstacles does pilot theory have to overcome through more research before it can become a more uniformly accepted theory?