Game over is more relative to altitude, rates of decent, and other factors including implementing proactive mitigation vs reactive. I believe the technology that the developers have in mind is proactive. In other words looking at and learning the behavior of sensors, other inputs, metrics, and flight paths to establish patterns or sequences that lead to failures and then proactively implementing a safe landing solution under similar circumstances.
In reactive, "oh ****" scenarios, the proposed tech may or may not apply. A "system" may not be able to "auto-react" in a scenario where a bird fails and falls from 25 ft (1.28 sec to impact). But conditions at 125 ft (2.8 sec to impact) could be an entirely different story and reduce force of impact sufficiently to avoid injury and/or damage.
You have to keep in mind that much of the push to impose potentially overbearing regulations on drone flight has to do with the perception and actuality of safety. Anything that "affordably" mitigates risk without sacrificing performance or imposition of regulations, benefits all of us.
For the record, I've done controls programming and am aware of what micro control circuits can do in fractions of seconds. So while it may be a complete waste of
@jeffames226's time, it's obviously not a waste of others'.
Ymmv