I would say it gives you an impression of how being a student of physics will be in the worst case possible. That is, if a) your lecturers cannot offer anything that beats reading a book by yourself and b) if your fellow students hate you and refuse to discuss with you. One of the best aspects of being a physics student is that you have an environment of people with a similar interest - and an interest to discuss it.
Textbooks will, in my opinion, give you a wrong/misleading expression when it comes to what working in physics is like. They mostly contain what is already known, and often do so in a rather dogmatic style. The main criterion for choosing exercises is that they can be easily solved and demonstrate something about the topic introduced (same as the exercises given to students). Working as a physicists is about the unknown, much less dogmatic, contains lots of trial&error (textbooks obviously don't spend lot of time to discuss all the approaches tried in the last 100-200 years that did not work), and often requires calculations that are much less elegant as the cherry-picked homework exercises. Plus side to this is: no one expects you to finish your assignment by next week (except for "write one paragraph about what you did last year for the upcoming conference" or stuff like that).
Rules of thumb: If you like doing calculations and learn something from the calculations (like what would have happened if one input condition would have been different) then physics may be interesting for you. Alternatively (but probably hard to decide for you): If you love to see how actual measurements of something fit to what the calculations predicted, then physics may be interesting for you. Whether these calculations/measurements are decays of a radioactive substance or the mean density of uncooked rice does not matter much, in my experience.
