Really not seen much evidence of this. What players? For starters, they haven't even tried the approach I am talking about. Where is this data coming from? If anything, many players love maps like C2C with long drives, even when the quality is incredibly poor. I find C2C too poor to use but I'd gladly take SCS good quality nature scenery if the interstate corridors could be doubled in length."players will object that many things are not there and could be (and it would be true) or mappers themselves will just want to use free space to have cities nicer and bigger (like bit more american)"
I am sure a 1:10 map by SCS would still be somewhat decent quality and way beyond C2C if just a little more work went into it than the 1:20 maps. 4x is not needed. Neither is double the price. They could have given us rural areas with lots of nature really so the cities could breathe and raised the price like 1.5x. The DLCs are already too cheap honestly. In fact I'd even take the same amount of scenic towns we have now on 1:10 and just nature in and around just to give it some breathing room. Long drives are nice to many players, even if it means not hitting a scenic town or truck stop constantly. And whats wrong with leaving some space as simply nature, if a map modder wants to fill in cities? You can still have a very high quality map even though cities are a bit more sparse.
Also, could you perhaps consider using a full stop (.) sometimes? It's easier to read what you write that way.