For a house to still be kept standing in 60 or a 100 years time, it will have to still be relevant to the needs of the people of that time. Crystal balls are in short supply so rather than try to predict their needs, new houses have to offer things that never go out of fashion (solidity, elegance, space, light) and/or be easily adaptable (extendable, modifiable, refurbish-able).

Three of the last four buildings we lived in were built before 1850 with masonry walls and a timber framed roof, the fourth was from the 1970s and built the same way except with concrete block rather than stone walls, and a concrete ground floor. None of them are being heated in the way they were originally designed, they have all been insulated, extended, and rearranged internally, and had windows and kitchens and roof coverings replaced. All will last longer than their builders expected.

I would speculate that a long-life house built now should have a solidly built masonry shell, timber frame roof, thin partition walls and floors. Services and airtight layers should be accessible/modifiable rather than integrated deep in the construction. It should look timeless on the outside rather than faddy, have plenty of light and space both inside and outside.

The current push is for building houses with a lot of embodied energy and carbon (cement/lime, steel, polystyrene) but low running energy usage/emissions/costs. In time I would expect the pendulum to swing back the other way as energy will decarbonise faster than manufactured materials, maybe swinging towards timber and stone construction again?