The problem of course is the same people who have refused to wear masks or take any other preventative measures because they claim they "don't work", are also preemptively refusing to take a 90%-effectiveness-rate vaccine because they're idiots.
I don't think that's necessarily a huge issue, because besides protecting n% of people who take them (though I don't think there's any way to know if you're one of the fortunate n% or not, unless you find out the hard way that you're not), vaccines are also a non-lethal way of achieving herd immunity because the lucky n% who can't be infected by the virus won't be able to pass it on to anyone else, and the rate of infection goes right down.
In the UK, we're being told that (by the government's scientific advisors and independent experts as well as by politicians) that, assuming the vaccination programme goes according to plan, we should be able to start easing up on lockdowns and restrictions sometime around next Easter because, by that time, the R-rate should be low enough to mean the virus will be burning out.
From then, we are told, it'll be more like regular flu, in that it'll remain an illness that can kill but, so long as sufficient people keep their vaccinations up, it ceases to be a major threat to public health.
While herd immunity keeps up, anti-vaxxers are pretty safe, just as people who don't bother with a flu vaccination don't run a particularly great risk of catching it most years.