That said, you have only described the structure of the game, but not talked at all about what the bowling interaction feels like. If you want to convince us that this game satisfies the definition of game feel, then the player would have to get a real sense of the physical characteristics of the simulated space simply by the manner in which they throw the ball, and the way that (as a result) it interacts with the space. This is no simply physics: how will you convey the materials, the physical (or synthetic) characteristics of the objects, by virtue of the throw. A “simple realistic physics model” probably won’t convey anything compelling, especially since it will be almost impossible to make it feel real.

The prototyping plan doesn’t address this: what is the feel you are trying to achieve? How will you know if you get it or, more importantly, haven’t gotten it? Any game designer that uses a physics engine must have a really clear picture in their mind of what they are trying to achieve with the simulation. Otherwise, you don’t know what to do when it “doesn’t feel right” … and, when you are learning to use physics engines, it’s pretty much guaranteed it won’t. So, please tell us what you are trying to achieve.

Beyond the needs of P3, I recommend against puzzle games for the final project. Good puzzles are hard, and take a long time to balance once you come up with them. For a project that must be done in such a short time, you don’t want the success of the game to hinge on something you are unlikely to have the time to achieve. That’s one of the big reasons I’m requiring folks to focus on games that have the 3 characteristics of game feel: they tend to be real-time, direction control interactive games, rather than puzzle or strategy games (although they can have those components).