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.

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.

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 :)

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.

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.

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.

I remember when I attended one of the TA's office hours for this class, this TA told me a quote that perfectly sums up Barry O'Neill's POL SCI 30 class: "Go to the lectures for Conceptual/Game in the News, go to Section/Office Hours for the Math". Barry O'Neill is a very kind hearted soul; however, his ability to deliver comprehensible sentences in regards to explaining/teaching Game Theory is unfortunately nonexistent. In analyzing Barry's class, here are his Pros and Cons

Pros:

The mathematical material for Barry's class is easy to learn if you exclusively rely on your TA. Your TA will be the reason you master the math in regards to Game Theory, they are their to teach you the formulas and how to solve various problems in order to succeed for this class. My "TA" was one of the best "TA's" I ever had at UCLA and she was able to help me fully understand every mathematical concept within Barrys class. Go to every, and I mean EVERY, office hours and section to fully understand the mathematical material in Barry's class

Barry's homework assignments are easy and short, if you attend office hours, the TA's will help you solve the material

Attending Section counts as participation points (so easy grade points lol)

The Mid-term and Final mathematical material is doable if you attend every section, office hours appointments, and if you study properly

Barry as a person is very approachable (at least in person), extremely kind, charming, and entertaining individual. I was blessed to meet Barry and I am happy that I was able to have a teacher that was so kind.

Barrys slides for his lecture are easily accessible via canvas and Barry releases review problems from time to time to prepare for the mid-term and final

If you are a graduate student considering teaching for Barry, TA FOR HIM. I obviously have not TA'd for Barry but I can tell it will be very fun to do so.

Apparently Barry is a lenient and kind grader? I have no idea how yet but I guess this is true.

Cons

Now this is one of the biggest flaws of his class: Barry can not teach. I do not mean this as an insult, I mean this as a form of criticism of his teaching rather then a criticism of who Barry is. I have had teachers in the past where I have said "this class is so hard, they can't teach" and have always took back what I said after finishing the class... but for Barry, I mean it. Barry's conceptual, theoretical, and news wise lectures are delivered in a very disorganized and incomprehensible manner where many people can not even understand what Barry is talking about half the time and how it relates to game theory. Heck, even the TA's do not have a clue what Barry is lecturing about sometimes in class and when the students ask the TA's about conceptual/game in the news information, the TA's tell them to ask Barry because even they don't understand some of the material Barry is attempting to teach.

Barry is hard to reach out to via email in regards to zoom meetings and will sometimes not respond to emails

Keeping in mind the biggest con for this class, Barrys conceptual questions within the mid-term or Final can be convoluted or difficult to answer no matter how much you study and you do not have a lot of resources to rely on upon clearing up this confusion.

I recommend to NEVER RELY ON BARRY FOR MATH. Barry is not the greatest lecturer in terms of conceptual material, but he is completely unable to teach math. Just rely on the TA's, trust me please.

Overall I enjoyed the time I spent in Barrys class and with the TA's (as I love math related material); however, I would of preferred to have a professor that could clearly lecture upon the material Barry attempted to teach.

If Barry or any of the TA's read this, I do not mean any of these criticisms as an insult, rather as comments in regards to my honest feelings about this class and some criticisms to take in mind to improve the quality of your class for the future.

Overall I give this class a 3/5. I do not recommend to take this class if you can get a better lower div pol sci class or if you can get a different pol sci 30 professor; however, I do recommend this class if its the best out of other options that are also not good (I am looking at you Tyson Roberts...)

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.