Comparing the G41 and the MG34 in Red Orchestra is a flawed argument, and here's why.
The MG34 does not have nearly the amount of impact in the game as the G41 one does. This is the fault of improper gameplay mechanics, or the lack thereof. A machinegunner is nowhere near as effective as a man with a G41 because A) The Machinegunner was be deployed, and we know how awful of a mess that is at the moment, B) The G41 is much more accurate than a deployed MG, and finally C) The player with a G41 can stand/crouch/peek around corners and do everything to avoid enemy fire. A machinegunner can't and is a sitting duck. Anything a machinegunner can do, a semiautomatic rifleman can do better.
Now I am not saying either weapon does not have its faults; surely they both do and that is why they were replaced with a new and improved version. This game needs weapon jams or something of that nature to fix these innacuracies. What it all boils down to is this - If Red Orchestra had the Chauchaut, it would perform perfectly, and that is both an injustice to history and to selling Red Orchestra as a realistic game. The same thing can be said now for the G41 and MG34, or any weapon for that matter (and I won't even bring up tanks). Everything performs perfectly fine, everything single time something is fired. I am not asking for super-ultra-realism, but I think jams should be an occurence based on the weapon being used based on actual field performance.
A person in a game I was in today suggested Tripwire should add the FG-42. I told him that it was a rare weapon. He replied that the paratroopers used it, to which I said they stopped using the Fallschirmjager after the invasion of Crete. He said 'so?'. This seems like the path RO is headed. What's next, the SKS?