Here’s a good and authoritative summary.
Strategic Setting
When United States Army and Navy forces began pushing west into the Pacific after the disaster at Pearl Harbor, they had their ultimate objective, the Japanese home islands, clearly in mind. However, they lacked any detailed list of preliminary objectives that would bring them to the enemy’s shores. Each island victory raised anew the question of the next intermediate goal. By the summer of 1944 the Allies faced a number of choices in the Pacific. They could continue directly west from Hawaii on a Central Pacific thrust that had just won them the Marshall Islands. They could continue toward the Philippines on a Southwest Pacific course that had recently won New Guinea. Or they could continue operations along both of these axes simultaneously.
During 1943 influential personalities in the U.S. Army and Navy lined up behind different strategies for the Pacific. The Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Ernest J. King, favored focusing Allied efforts against Japan in a thrust westward from Hawaii. Seconded by Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief, Pacific Ocean Areas and Pacific Fleet, King argued that his Central Pacific strategy also represented the most direct route to the Philippines and would, at the same time, place American forces on the enemy line of communications between Japan and the oil-rich East Indies. King repeated his Central Pacific proposal at the Trident Conference in Washington in May, but it was neither approved nor rejected.
King's major opponent was General Douglas MacArthur, the Allied Southwest Pacific theater commander. MacArthur agreed on the need to return to the Philippines but not via the Marshalls and Marianas. Instead, he proposed a Southwest Pacific strategy: an extension of his own command's operations in New Guinea, which would push Allied forces westward through Morotai and then northward into the Philippines.
A series of Allied planning conferences in 1943 failed to resolve the issue. The strong identification of each strategy with a different military service Central Pacific with the U.S. Navy and Southwest Pacific with the U.S. Army tended to undermine an unbiased appraisal of either course-of action and to encourage the potentially dangerous pursuit of both with inadequate resources. Finally, toward the end of 1943, a technological development began to influence the issue. The Army Air Forces announced the imminent appearance of a new long-range bomber, the B-29. The new weapon strengthened the Central Pacific strategy, since the island chain particularly desired by Admiral King the Marianas lay 1,270 miles from Tokyo, comfortably within the l,500-mile radius of the new aircraft. At the second Cairo Conference in December 1943 the Allies thus approved seizure of the Marianas, tentatively scheduled for October 1944. Subsequent operations along this axis would include seizure of the Palaus to secure the flank for the turn northwest into the Philippines.
Although these decisions gave priority to the Central Pacific strategy, they did not amount to a rejection of MacArthur's Southwest Pacific proposals. In fact, the Joint Chiefs of Staff reaffirmed in March 1944 that the advance toward Japan would continue on both the Central and Southwest Pacific axes. At the same time, unexpectedly rapid success in the Marshalls allowed planners to advance the assault on the Marianas from October to June.
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/USA-C-WestPac/
Other factors were at play, notably the need to neutralise the major Japanese military and naval base at Rabaul and naval base atTruk, with the former being a combined services operation and the latter a naval and air operation which destroyed numerous IJN and transport ships. Each operation removed the threat of significant IJN operations in the rear of the SWPA and Central Pacific thrusts towards Japan.
Regardless of the extent to which MacArthur’s drive towards the Phillipines arose from his personal motives and conceit, and regardless of the fact that it was not the most direct or best route to Japan compared with the Central Pacific thrust, it made a major and very necessary contribution to the Central Pacific thrust and to overall victory over Japan by drawing in massive numbers of IJA troops (roughly 400,000 in New Guinea alone, from memory) which otherwise would have been available to resist the landings in the Central Pacific and which might perhaps have produced a different result against Allied landings. It’s not only the number of IJN troops deployed to the SWPA but also the diversion of Japan’s critically short and, as the war wore on, rapidly diminishing transport shipping to attempt to supply them over long distances which also diminished the ability of Japan to defend against the Central Pacifc thrust. Similarly, the Philippines campaign drew in major IJN forces which were severely reduced, thus removing them from the Central Pacific advance and, later, home islands defence resulting in the so-called ‘turkey shoot’ in the closing stages of the war. The net result of the SWPA and Central Pacific thrusts was that it forced Japan to spread its forces and resources too thinly against an advancing enemy with much greater forces and resources. Either thrust on its own probably would not have brought the war to a conclusion in anything like the same time as actually happened, so the ‘island hopping’ campaign in both theatres was a necessary step to victory.
Against that background there were various shades of personal opinion influencing strategy, such as MarArthur’s conceit and vainglory pushing for a return to the Phillipines and Admiral King’s determination that US forces weren’t going to be used help the British recover their Empire so that a Central Pacific thrust kept US forces away from Malaya / Singapore / Borneo (there’s an interesting, much better informed than me, and fairly short survey of writings on King and his strategic thinking at http://padresteve.com/2009/11/29/lessons-in-coalition-warfare-admiral-ernest-king-and-the-british-pacific-fleet/ which presents King as more balanced and strategically shrewd in his opposition to Royal Navy involvement than the common and more simplistic “I’m not going to help the Limeys regain their colonies” presentation of King).