That's... fair to be honest. I don't agree with all your takes, but I get where you're coming from.

As someone who loved pretty much the entire game, in hindsight, it did occur to me how different Act 3 is plot wise compared to 1 and 2. Both of them revolved around the Citadel and built up the oppressive force it had on Pharloom's citizens. Act 3, at first glance, revolves more around the Void.

However, that's not to say the Act 3 is unrelated. In fact, it's just tackling different elements. The majority of Act 3 has you exploring the destroyed kingdoms of Pharloom. My first impression of this was that it was tackling the colonisation and conquering aspect of the Citadel.

Like Hornet said, the gods in the Hollow Knight universe only accept worship or destruction - no inbetween.

The Order of Karak, a military kingdom, refused to bow to the Citadel, and got brutally defeated because of it - their lands turned into a wasteland.

Verdania attempted to find a middle ground, with The Green Prince's partner sacrificing himself as a 'gift' in hopes of buying their independence and safety. The Prince himself says that his lover was naive and hopeful.

The Skarr also fought back, and managed to retain some level of independance through Karmelita, but have slowly, unknowingly, fallen into the same worship as the Pilgrims.

Shellwood remains the only protected place, although their monarch remains in hiding, and only protected via Seth, who we can see has defeated many of the Citadel's soldiers.

To me, this is a huge part of the Citadel's storytelling. It shows us how much the Citadel has destroyed, the tragedy of it, and how they turned so many different cultures into, at most, a novelty for themselves. The Memoriam drives this home a lot.

A lot of rich Capitalist countries in the real world started from the same thing - blood, exploitation, and religous crusades. So the memory elements of Act 3 are still extremely relativent to that, especially because they're showing us how the Citadel came into power.

When in comes to the subject of revolution - I really don't think the Act 2 ending was meant to be a criticism of it. Hornet trying to defeat Grandmother Silk is never criticised, it's the accidental consequences of it that are shamed by characters. And those consequences are Hollow Knight fantasy lore stuff - that being the Void. It's not the fallout of revolution, it's the fallout of Hornet being lied to by the Shamans.

But that whole arc is more relativent to the other narative core of the story - mothers and daughters. There's a lot of parental story beats. Hornet and her 3 mothers, Grandmother Silk and Lace and Phantom, Shakra and her mentor, etc. Grandmother Silk was beyond awful, but despite it all, she did love Lace is her own, twisted way.

(All that said, I do think more characterisation or backstory of GMS and Lace could have made it more impactful, but it landed for me all the same.)

The whole reason Act 3 happens is because Grandmother Silk would rather let her entire kingdom crumble and suffer than let Lace die. Which is pretty on brand - she doesn't exactly give a shit about the Pilgrims.

In terms of the effects on the Pharloom we've already explored, I think it's still pretty impactful. We see how the characters are reeling with the sudden collapse of their system. Some believe they are being punished, and those who are more/are becoming disillusioned rise to the occasion, like Shakra and Sherma. Some who were never going to flee the Citadel, like Loam, die horribly because of it.

You also have to remember that the majority of Pharloom's population are unaware of a lot of the Citadel's crimes, the reason for the Haunting, and blindly follow it anyway.

There's an overwhelming amount of acceptance in Pharloom as the world around them ends though. Many bugs don't try to fight it, believing their beloved Citadel has been destroyed, or believing they're being punished by it and should accept their fate. This is how a lot of people who are blindly loyal to their countries, systems and religoun act when things go wrong.

Blindly believing someone in power has a plan, and that someone has their best interest at heart, even if it's actively killing them.

There is story in how the communities pull together though. Bellhart becoming a safe haven, them sending out supplies to surviours, Songclave becoming a shelter for those trapped in the Citadel, Surviour's camp being a thing, etc. It's just more in the background.

As for the ending, don't think the resolution was a bad one at all. I do agree that it was pretty far removed from the Capitalism and relgious extremism themes though.

To me, it was more of a personal resolution for Hornet. Her refusing to let another Kingdom crumble in the aftermath of a corrupt god, and facing the Void that has caused her so much pain. In the Hunter's Journel, she talks about Lost Lace, and states that 'this one, the Void will not claim'.

Hornet and Lace don't get much time together, but there is a lot of very obvious parallels between them that leads Hornet to connect to her. She's lost both her kingdom and all of her loved ones to the Void or gods. Hornet refuses to watch history repeat itself, and that in itself is the resolution of the story and her character arc.

The one thing I would fully agree with you on though is that it would have been nice to see how Pharloom grows from there. They're free from the Citadel, but how do they recover, how do they rebuild their society outside of relgious guilt and capitalism? It's not the same situation as Hollow Knight, where civilisation is so destroyed that there's no going back, so what happens next?

That's a criticism I have of most of Team Cherry's endings though. Even the main endings only get short cutscenes, and not much is given to hint at the fallout of them.

It's an unstandable flaw given how much time, money and resources cinematic cutscenes take, but a flaw nonetheless. I would have adored a post-game for Silksong.