Yes, it is of value. Like all values, it is not absolute. The price of implementing that value can be too high. It is at least sometimes the case that the implementation of the value produces off-centre governments. But voters, including under PR systems, do value a say in the composition of governments. As it happens in many PR systems, electoral coalitions are struck in advance, and coalition agreements are, de facto, part of the package that people are voting on. Even where such agreements exist, or even where they don't exist, there is a slice of voters who see the vote as carrying strategic value vis-à-vis the composition of the government.
There's this kind of general point made by Matt Shugart, who's one of the leading students of this stuff, that what we have with first past the post, and to a certain extent with the majority formula, is in some sense an electoral framework that is maximally efficient. It's not perfect, but it's maximally efficient in realizing the directness of impact on the choice of government. But it does so at the price of representativeness, and in particular of the potential for a government that covers the median, so to speak.