I would be scared to buy a house that uses non-standard construction methods. Not because I don't trust the plans, but because even with cookie cutter houses, the construction people mess up a lot of things and you really have to pay an additional person to check the construction. Trying to get construction companies to build a house using novel techniques and do it without major errors is, I imagine, quite an undertaking.
Unless, perhaps, one of the advantages in these alternative construction techniques is that they're more construction-error-tolerant. That's, for example, one of the key advantages in suspension bridges: any individual support cable can be installed in a stupid out-of-tolerance way, because load is just redirected evenly to all the other cables. Usually, in fact, "cheaper to build" almost always means "because the materials and techniques used mean that even a sloppy construction process will still produce good results."
UK: we had big problems with 'system build' council housing in the UK in 1960s and early 1970s. Google 'Bison' and 'Ronan Point' for background.
I'd hope that we have (all) learned a bit about pre-manufactured sections and assembly since then and perhaps pre-manufactured units with quality control/JIT manufacturing techniques would be better than the current bricks on site based construction.
UK: the problem would be the land to build on anywhere near population centres and utilities by the way...
