Barry O’Neil is many things: A myth, a meme, a nice guy, an actual wizard of game theory (not a joke look him up)... a good teacher— unfortunately— is not one of them. Barry uses creative but convoluted examples to explain a lot of otherwise easy concepts and many things get lost in translation. The assignments however, and the actual content of the class, are straightforward and easy. If your TA has any sort of brain, this will be an enjoyable class (despite Barry’s interesting teaching antics) that’s totally possible to get an A in. A lot of people took Barry the wrong way and assumed he was trying to be malign somehow when in reality he was teaching the only way he knows how. Furthermore, he was always accessible and more than happy to answer questions in his office hours. In other words, he puts in the work, is a genuinely nice guy, and a game theory legend, but sometimes can explain things the wrong way. Is that a reason not to take this class? I don’t know, you tell me.

I’d be happy to take another class with Barry again.

I have very mixed feelings about this class.
Barry is probably one of the most genuine professors at UCLA. He is unashamedly himself during lectures, but this, unfortunately, comes across as extremely confusing . This class was an overwhelming experience because the professor only talked about what interested him; he didn't take a whole lot of time to teach the basics of game theory. Barry is undoubtedly a brilliant mathematician and game theorist. He just had a lot of difficulty breaking it down into simpler concepts and making it clear. Barry said at the beginning of the quarter that the textbook was mandatory, but he didn't actually use it (DON'T BUY IT).
Another downside to this class is that you have absolutely no idea how you are performing. The TAs try to be as up front as possible with you, but Barry doesn't even tell them how he's grading the class. The midterm grade was determined by quintiles- the top 20% get As, the next 20% get Bs, and so on. Barry told us at the beginning that we would get put in a quintile relative to how the entire class performed. During sections, though, the TAs said that they were told to put us in quintiles according to ONLY their sections. Because of this confusion, I had no clear idea of how I was performing in the class.
Without my TA, Cybele Kappos, I would understand very little about game theory. I probably would have flunked the midterm.
If you take this class with Barry, expect funny, but confusing, lectures. Expect to learn everything from your TA. Expect to watch Kathy Bawn's pre-recorded lectures on YouTube. Expect to watch GameTheory101 on YouTube.

There are many questions in life: What's at the end of a rainbow? Do aliens exist? What is my purpose? Why are people so arbitrarily upset at Barry O'Niel; game theory celebrity, master procrastinator, and living legend? Is there a god?

I do not know the answer to any of these questions. However, I will attest that this class is not hindered by Barry's occasional lack of clarity. He really puts effort in (although he will procrastinate on things like, say, writing tests, grading everything, etc), the content of the course is very straightforward and easy, and he doesn't assign much work. The TA's in my class were all extremely helpful. Barry's office hours were solid and consistent. If you strained your hearing and asked clarifying questions you could even easily make sense out of some of Barrys odd examples. It's a good class and I'd take it again.

Ok. Can Professor O'Neill be confusing at times? Yes. There were times during lecture where my friends and I would just look at each other in complete and utter confusion. However, this doesn't make Barry a bad professor. Barry is probably one of the nicest, funniest professors I've had the pleasure of having so far. Sometimes I would leave lecture actually understanding the material! That being said, my godly TA (Cybele Kappos!!) would fill in all the gaps during section. As a Poli Sci major with zero affinity for math or stats, some subjects made me nervous when we first learned them, like chance and mixed strategy nash equilibrium. Learning these in lecture certainly made me nervous, as sometimes it was hard to keep up with what Barry was saying. However, when he got to the actual calculations, it became pretty straight forward. He also demonstrated "games" for us often, which was fun. From what I've heard from my friends in different sections, your TA can possibly make or break your grade. The midterm was EXACTLY like the homework and practice problems he gives, so it was fairly easy for me. There's also the fact that Barry doesn't believe in "traditional grading systems", meaning you do not receive an actual letter grade for your midterm, but a percentile. This was nervewracking because, despite knowing our percentiles, everyone went through the entire course without ever knowing their actual grades. Overall though, I enjoyed the course and loved having Barry as a professor and Cybele as a TA :)

I really enjoyed this class. A lot of people from W21 are going to complain for literally no reason but just ignore the negative reviews. His lectures are recorded, you don't have to show up. I did but I usually was only half paying attention. Everything is made clear during discussion. The actual math involved is extremely basic algebra so don't stress about that. Is Prof O'Neill a bit of a scatter brain? Yes. Are his slides a bit messy sometimes? Yes. Would I take a class with him again? Absolutely. He is the sweetest man and clearly cares a lot about student learning. The grading scheme is very generous, pretty much everyone gets a B- or better, with the majority getting As. Take this class!

Prof. is wholesome, funny, and loves to bring up stories about things he's interested in or experienced. In the beginning, it was pretty difficult to distinguish if he was talking about random stories or if it was actually related to the content... turns out, it was related to the content. It comes across as getting sidetracked, but you need to know the stories and his opinions!! The technical parts of game theory can be confusing during his lectures, but the TA's were really helpful during section. Prof's slides can be disorganized at times, and he'd fix them during class.

The midterm caught us off guard. We were expecting more math-related stuff, and while that was on there, a LOT of it was based on his opinions. After the midterm though, we were more prepared because we knew what his tests would look like. The final was a good mix of his stories and the math stuff. It was worth 40% of your grade, but he claims to be lenient with grading!

Bottom Line: This class can be really confusing, TA's will help you with the actual math stuff, his opinions/stories are important and ARE related to concepts. I liked the prof though, he was very nice and seems like a great teacher that's just struggling with the technology. I think he'd have a much easier time teaching if this were in person.

Just a warning for Winter 2021 reviews. Some reviews are going to complain about how they were confused/the professor wasn't helpful/the professor didn't like collaboration on homework. During the quarter a large scale weekly homework review session (with roughly 80-90 people in attendance) was held over zoom by a student. Soon, the professor and TAs caught on to the fact that people were having the same answers on homework assignments and told the students to stop as it breaches academic integrity. Students were angry saying the professor wasn't helpful however the professor revealed that often times he would have zero students in attendance during his office hours, and many of the TAs had similar experiences. Furthermore, there was only 3 people who would actually ask questions during lecture and hardly anybody used the chat (even though the TAs would answer any questions given in the chat in-depth). The Professor didn't push any action against it and just kindly requested that students attend office hours instead, which is something very generous given the situation at hand. He even encouraged the TAs to being recording their discussion sections (something which isn't done in order to promote attendance for our participation grade) in order to ensure further clarity on materials learned in class.

Overall, I believe that people are giving O'Neill harsher views than he should receive. The biggest issue the professor had was simply his struggle with technology. However, even with such a struggle the TAs helped to guide him through any difficulties he experienced. For the final exam, due to the previous issue of confusion each TAs had review sessions and some of them recorded and posted them to CCLE for others to watch. The professor also held two final review sessions (which extended past his 2 hour limit as he stayed on longer to ensure everyone's question was answered) during finals week to ensure that students could ask their questions - on top of him providing a study guide.

Lectures were spent with a heavy emphasis on real world examples and application. He did often times repeat some stuff learned in previous lectures, however he would rework homework assignments and exams to reflect what has and hasn't been taught in lecture. The professor even gave a 10 minute break during the 90 minute lecture to offer students a break from their screens (something which was very appreciated).

Discussion sections were amazing. Where there may have been some confusion with the professor, the TAs collaborated on slides and examples to insure that every student was getting answers to their questions. No matter which TA you had, the slides were the same in-depth and worked out. There was a discrepancy in grading however, as some TAs would grade on a 3 point system and others graded out of percentages.

Homework was fairly easy. Personally, it would take me between 25-45 minutes a week to do them. Much of the homework questions would reflect real life scenarios and should any of the questions have confusing wording, the professor was able to clarify.

Exams are where some issues may arise. Roughly 30% of the exam was questions based upon his examples in class, which many of my classmates found to be unfair. However, both the midterm and final exams were multiple choice, with all the answers easily accessible in either his lectures or his slides. (To the point where for the final exam some people just used the transcripts of the video and did fairly well). This class had zero essays and zero written assignments. His grading system is a bit complex, where it isn't a set percentage, rather he calculates the grade range based upon where the majority of people lie (keeping a majority of people above a B-). It is a little stressful, as it is difficult to understand what your grade is going into the final and even what it is after the final. (I know some reviews are complaining about how long it takes for him to give back final grades, however we have athletes in the class this quarter who had to take it at a later date, which causes the delay).

Overall, professor O'Neill cares about his students. Looking at any grade distribution will show you that. He's kind and funny and given the technology boundary of this quarter, he tried his best to ensure that class was engaging and that we had some involvement in class activities. He gave us plenty of information and preparation for final exams and treated a very big issue like academic integrity in a very kind manner, and one that is an extreme outlier given what happens. Chances are, future classes will be in person, so the issue of technology won't be that prevalent. For a humanities class that uses math, I believe that the professor and TAs did a wonderful job in insuring that students understood what was happening and gave plenty of opportunities should individuals need any help.

While Barry was sometimes disorganized with his slides, he is an extremely nice professor and we usually just laugh off any minor blunders. The class itself is not difficult; like any other, if you put the work in, you will succeed. TAs were helpful in explaining anything that was still confusing from lecture. If I'm honest, sometimes going to lecture made the content seem more confusing than when I learned it myself. You can decide whether or not you want to attend. All in all, I would take this class again because I found the content enjoyable and Barry's a sweet old man with an obsession for swiffers.

I have never been more confused in my life. The professor managed to make the easiest concepts seem like rocket science. After completing this course, I feel like I could tell you more about the professor's personal life than about any actual game theory. His tests and assignments are riddled with errors and his slides are extremely disorganized and confuse instead of clarify what on earth is going on in the class. To summarize, I would not recommend this class if you wish to possess even a fraction of serotonin.

O'Neill is a very nice professor. A lot of the readings were very interesting and I really enjoyed the content of the class. The discussion sections were a COMPLETE waste of time. I really don't understand why they are a part of his class. His tests are also pretty difficult M/C. I did terrible on both tests. There is also a paper. In the end, I think most people got A's. The tests were confusing. There were a lot of questions phrased like "In lecture, I said.." or with A,B,C,and D options that could each be correct. Overall , it was a very confusing class and hard to understand how well you were doing in the course until grades were finalized.