That's an easy one to answer: Because it was by far the largest, and it completely changed the course of the War in Europe...
Normandy was not the largest amphibious landing of the war. That would be the Battle of Leyte Gulf (and possibly the largest of all time) but the Russian tank battle at Kursk was the largest tank battle and the Russian land invasion from the East was, by far, the largest of its kind. It took all three to defeat the Germans but only one consisted of a Western force so naturally that is the one we celebrate. You also need to remember there were several significant battles after Normandy that could have easily gone the wrong way; Market Garden (major defeat) and The Bulge (almost a defeat) were but two of these.
While the Western armies consider their part of the European War to be the significant part it was the Russians who would have beat down the Nazi armies eventually with or without our participation. The Germans simply did not have enough manpower in arms nor manufacturing capacity to overcome the Russians. Once the Germans were stopped at Moscow (and several other sites) the writing was on the wall.
As fierce and bloody as the Island hopping was in the Pacific Theatre: The outcome was pretty much inevitable.
I do not think a single senior military commander would have shared that opinion with you from Pearl Harbor through the defense of Guadalcanal - especially Dugout Doug MacArthur.
The Japanese military government was convinced that the significant destruction of our capital ships at Pearl Harbor would leave us with no possibility except to sue for peace. They failed to follow up virtually every major victorious battle with a knock-out blow.
Initially, the only thing that stopped the Japanese navy from an invasion of Hawaii and/or the West Coast were three carriers (one of which still had yard workers repairing it when it entered the Battle of Midway), a tiny fleet of submarines (which the Japanese continued to ignore from Pearl Harbor to the end of the war) and a handful of almost obsolete and/or damaged capital ships and destroyers.
It wasn't the island hopping that determined the outcome of the Pacific War but rather the manufacturing capacity of the USA. For the first two years of that conflict a handful of Aussie Coastwatchers and some old Asiatic Squadron ships, and subs, held the line until the American shipyards could build state of the art capital ships and the crews to man them. Japan could not to replace their losses and failed to appreciate the intelligence forces that allowed the ambush at Midway to turn the tide of the Pacific War. Japan also failed to recognize the American submarine threat that eventually prevented movement of war materiel from the conquered territories back to the home country. As a result, Japan literally ran out of gas.
Had the Japanese followed up Pearl Harbor with an invasion of Hawaii they would have had complete control of the Pacific theater and it would have been years before the USA, if ever, could have retaken that territory. Had they then proceeded to wipe out the shipyards and oil production on the West Coast the Pacific War might have ended almost immediately. Their shortsightedness gave the USA the time to rearm and respond and knowing that Yamamoto had worked and lived in the USA and knew firsthand of its manufacturing capacities it is most improbable he stopped at Hawaii.