Realtime Extreme 3D Graphics

Its not "low resources" it just a method to directly scan real world instead of imitating it. The you have this model and put it into the game. However its not really "low resources either" oh boy - this room alone is a lot of polygons there... and everybody knows that normals are the cheaper version of small polygons.
Its faster but is it more efficient considering hardware? Absolutely not. (This can be evidenced in 2nd video as the framerate there is just horrendous!
That being said while I dont think it would benefit a game industry it could be still very useful as educational software. Kids in school could watch historical buildings wich they would propably never see in their life (yes even considering that tourism is ever increasing).

If I want to sell you a product I wont tell you the faulty things abaut said product instead I will praise it as I ever could.

There is no reason to lie? They sell the technology that is behind these videos. "please contact us" "if you want a scan of historical object we will do this for free"
I watched all 3 videos and what I saw was definetly a photographic representation of real world but then... it didn't look that really that realistic. Propably because of the lightning. Anyhow what I also noticed was really bad framerate as you can quite easly distinguish frames in the last video. Considering that I don't think it is "low resources" at all.

But maybe Euclideon did have some interesting technique they didn't want to share.

I say this because they seem to have the product to show for, like the virtual cathedral or the street view.

Originally they don't have any product, just the demo island, then they have the Geospatial viewer, then the virtual cathedral.

But its all kind of crude looking, if they really had special method they should share it with giant company like Google. Imagine a faster Google Earth, maybe with a flyby mode that integrate street view seamlessly.

What a shitty buildup lol. You could immediately tell that those "real video clips" were absolutely not real. They could've at least not made the camera move in a perfect line, but the lighting still looked flat and unnatural. Edges look improper, and there's still little things it can't reproduce (like how almost ever structured surface has marginal amounts of glistering when you move). In particular, you can't reproduce marble, wet objects or metal with this approach. It will always look too, well, static during any movement.

Their main selling argument is how they can produce such detail with limited computer memory. It's not hard to see how, if they did manage to find a proper tree-based data structure that allows finding the point for a screen pixel in log(N), their claims of "unlimited" stuff will hold (as in, storage will be the limit). I'm still skeptical on disk access times though, pulling 1920x1080 pages from disk every frame is not going to work smoothly unless you can somehow cache stuff. Read: Small geometries (that largely fit into cache, like the cathedral) or repeating geometries (like what we saw years ago).

Quote from their website (actually the first thing you'll see going to their home page): "ACCESS ALL OF YOUR DATA IN LESS THAN A SECOND".
If "within at most a second" is what they want to use for real-time applications... Well you can see where this is going. And yes, the link refers you to using massive point cloud data on a normal PC, not some cloud storage solution.

Lol, another hilarious quote from their website: "By creating an ultra-efficient search algorithm – similar to the way that Google can instantly search the vast amounts of data on the internet – Bruce was able to fundamentally change the way that 3D data was handled by computers"
...what? Google can instantly search the entire internet? Right...
If he wants to compare his solution to the massive amount of infrastructure Google's datacenters are using... sure.

Nonsense Sprung
Everybody knows that Chuck Norris has internet on his floppy.