I agree 100% with DustRider's points in this case.  It should also be known that given some time, Octane WILL make it's way to the major studios.  It's a very young render engine, and just in it's first few stable releases out of beta.  However, it's ALREADY found it's way big-time into the arch/viz market, and is being used to some capacity there already.  Just browse their forums.  90% of the professional users there are working for major arch/viz studios, and using Octane for that purpose.  Why?  Because it's lightning fast, and you don't need to invest tens of thousands into a huge CPU render farm to get real time photorealistic walk throughs.  You can invest in a much smaller amount in some networked GPU Titan cards, and have literally thousands of cores to render with, for much cheaper.

The film studios are a different animal.  They are already heavily invested in million dollar render farms that are CPU based, and have their chosen engines already working in the pipeline.  They can't just uproot that to switch.  It's a much bigger deal then you might think.  However, it WILL happen. You will see movies being done 100% rendered with GPU farms soon enough, probably using unbiased engines like Octane.

In fact, Octane was already used to make a couple good shorts.  One in particular by a studio pro that stand out would be the Sanderson Camera short by Daniel Ahrens, where he averaged between 30 seconds and 5 minutes per frame using Octane on his GPU, and it's photorealistic all the way.  It was mainly a personal project of his, but there are others too.  So it's going to be in studios soon enough.  Just look at the quality of the short...

http://render.otoy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=35710&start=0

So obviously, the speed and quality are there, and GPU rendering is the future.

---

Tools :  3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.