By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Call of Duty: Vanguard Reportedly Had Worst Call of Duty UK Launch in 14 Years

Call of Duty: Vanguard Reportedly Had Worst Call of Duty UK Launch in 14 Years - Sales

by William D'Angelo , posted on 14 November 2021 / 2,249 Views

It was revealed earlier today the UK launch sales for Call of Duty: Vanguard are down 40 percent year-on-year compared to the launch of Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War. Physical sales are down 26 percent, while digital sales are dropped 44 percent.

Sources speaking with VideoGamesChronicle have reported Call of Duty: Vanguard had the worst launch for any Call of Duty game in the UK in 14 years.

2007's Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, the game that started the modern era Call of Duty games, was the only one to have sold fewer units in its opening week. 

Call of Duty: Vanguard Reportedly Had Worst Call of Duty UK Launch in 14 Years

2010's Call of Duty: Black Ops is the peak launch for any entry in the series. Call of Duty: Vanguard had a launch nearly 200 percent smaller. Even Call of Duty: Ghosts had a 52 percent bigger launch. 

It is possible the success of the the free-to-play battle royale game, Call of Duty: Warzone, impacted sales, as well as stronger competition this year from Battlefield 2042 and Halo Infinite.


A life-long and avid gamer, William D'Angelo was first introduced to VGChartz in 2007. After years of supporting the site, he was brought on in 2010 as a junior analyst, working his way up to lead analyst in 2012. In 2017, he took over the VGChartz hardware estimates. He has expanded his involvement in the gaming community by producing content on his own YouTube channel and Twitch channel dedicated to gaming Let's Plays. You can contact the author at wdangelo@vgchartz.com or on Twitter @TrunksWD.


More Articles

19 Comments
xMetroid (on 14 November 2021)

The world is healing

  • +6
Otter (on 15 November 2021)

Would love to see a decline in order to encourage new endevours but I think this is just most likely due to the phase in the generation with the core audience refusing to get last gen versions but the audience on the new platforms still not being big enough. I think its legs will be telling.

  • +4
DaAndy (on 14 November 2021)

What actually should "200% smaller" mean? I see VGC also writes "200% fewer copies", but it really makes no sense to me. 50% less is 50% of BO3, 90% less is 10% of BO3, 99% less is 1% of BO3, 100% less means "absolutely 0 units". Maybe for native english speakers it means something else than what I would think it means? Should it mean like 2010 Black Ops sold 3 times as much as 2021 Vanguard? Can someone explain it to me please?

  • +3
Zippy6 DaAndy (on 14 November 2021)

Yeah you're right the linked article and by extension this one doesn't make sense. "200% less" is impossible.

  • +2
shikamaru317 DaAndy (on 14 November 2021)

It's definitely poorly worded, but I think they meant to say that 2010's Black Ops sold 3x as many first week copies as CoD Vanguard did. Because 200% more copies equals 3x as many sales, they probably thought that the reverse, 200% fewer copies sold, would mean that Vanguard sold 1/3rd the copies that Black Ops did.

  • +5
victor83fernandes shikamaru317 (on 14 November 2021)

200% more = 2x more = 3x (not 3x more)

  • -1
Comment was deleted...
Comment was deleted...
Comment was deleted...
Comment was deleted...
shikamaru317 victor83fernandes (on 14 November 2021)

I feel like we're quibbling over a language divide here or something, rather than a math issue. My math in the initial post that you responded to has been right all along. I said 200% more equals 3x as many copies and you responded saying that 200% more = 2x more copies, which I confused as you saying that my math was wrong when it was never wrong in the initial post. The math in my later posts got screwed up by me using more because you said more.

Anyway I'm going to delete those earlier posts of mine since there were in error and about a misunderstanding and are just cluttering up the comments section.

  • +1
Comment was deleted...
Comment was deleted...
shikamaru317 victor83fernandes (on 15 November 2021)

I already explained why I deleted them above. You're really turning a mole hill into a mountain with this thing.

I also never said that 200% less is 1/3rd, I agree 200% less is a mathematical impossibility, I was trying to explain to DeAndy what the original writer of the Video Games Chronicle article with the 200% less might have been thinking when he said that, my guess is that it sold 1/3rd the copies that Black Ops sold, and because the reverse of 1/3rd is 3x , while 3x equals 200% increase, he may have thought that saying 200% less was accurate, when it is in fact not accurate, and mathematically impossible.

  • +1
victor83fernandes (on 14 November 2021)

200% less? so, -100%, that is not even possible, you cant sell less than 0 copies of a game

With that out of the way, the reason its not selling that well is price, have you guys seen the price difference? Vanguard is £63 pounds here in Britain (84.50 dollars)
Call of duty used to cost £45 (60 dollars), that's a 24.50 dollars price increase.

Other reason of the poor sales in comparison, Black ops 2010 had an amazing campaign, nowadays campaigns are just like a side dish, believe it or not, many gamers don't play online, ever, just like myself and that's why these new call of duties I buy them when they drop to 1/4 of the price

  • +1
Dulfite (on 14 November 2021)

Why play the 1732891th Call of Duty game and the 13726575939272^125th humans killing humans game when you could wait a few weeks to play the much less overdone humans vs. aliens experience of Halo?

Obviously, I'm taking about the campaigns.

  • -2
scrapking Dulfite (on 14 November 2021)

Yeah, the gameplay loop of Halo is very different than Call of Duty. It's not just the obvious difference of humans vs. aliens, but it's the much greater variety of challenge offered by radically different alien species/equipment, and it's the fact that your player character (not to mention some of the aliens) are shielded that adds further play-loop variety. Both are good, but I agree with you that if you've been playing the annual iterations of Call of Duty then you might be up for something different.

If you buy Call of Duty for the mutliplayer every year, then the upcoming 2042 and (especially) the AAA yet free-to-play Infinite multiplayer will be a huge draw over Vanguard. I've got the free trial of 2042 (thank you EA Play/Game Pass Ultimate) already downloaded, and have Infinite queued up for download once it goes Gold. The fact that one had a free trial, and that the other was straight-up free (multiplayer for everyone, plus also campaign if you have Game Pass). With everyone on Xbox and PC having a AAA free-to-play alternative to Vanguard, and Game Pass subscribers having two, that's a high bar for Vanguard to get past.

  • 0
victor83fernandes Dulfite (on 14 November 2021)

It has nothing to do with humans or aliens, Halo is better just because it has both amazing multiplayer and single player. Example, I never play online, ever, so for me Halo is already automatically a better investment.

  • 0