The reason GM hasn't gone to OHV OHC 32 valve is simple - and complex too.
The performance benefits don't really outweigh the cost benefits.
While the limitations of DOHC etc are higher, if you take similarly designed engines, of same capacity, same compression ratio, same induction method and same fuel delivery method, there is 3/5's of stuff all difference between outputs.
OHC increases deck height, parts count, system complexity, decreases reliability and cost.
OHV lowers centre of balance and is cheap.
Consider the following
210 hp (157 kW) @ 6500 rpm 194 lb·ft (263 N·m) @ 3300 rpm - Cadillac 2792 CC V6 DOHC - 0.056 Kw / CC on a c ratio of 10.1:1
2004–2005 Holden VZ Commodore 235 hp (175 kW) @ 6000 rpm 236 lb·ft (320 N·m) @ 2800 rpm 0.048 kW / CC on a c ration of 9.2
2006–2007 231 hp (172 kW) @ 6000 rpm 236 lb·ft (320 N·m) @ 2800 rpm - 0.0484 kW / CC on a c ratio of 9
Current ford inline 6 OHC 195 kW (261 hp) 391 N·m (288 lb·ft) 0.0487 kW / cc at a c ratio of 9.7:1
2008–2011 Cadillac CTS 304 hp (227 kW) @ 6400 rpm 273 lb·ft (370 N·m) @ 5200 rpm
RB30E - 2962CC 9.0:1 114kW - 0.385 kW / cc .
As you can see - capacity and compression ratio have a more pronounced effect on performance than cam and valve layout.
By the way - all forced induction does is artifically lift the compression ratio.