For years Nintendo , Microsoft and Sony have been creating new franchises. Many of these new franchises take up development resources of the first party developers and publishers. This leads to older franchises and some newer franchises being forgotten for years sometimes generation's and in the odd case forever.

Now I know many Nintendo fans did not like the Donkey Konga series or the StarFox:Assualt video game. But I myself enjoyed both titles I also like Blinx and some of Microsoft's third party collaborations. Recently the news was broken that Microsoft may be laying off Rare's entire art team though Microsoft says the lay offs are exagerated it is still a big deal.

This got me wondering will we ever see a true Conker sequel or how about a Banjo Threeie, or BlastCorps2 etc...etc... Also with Pikmin its been rumoured to be in development for ages. Or Custom Robo or any of Sony's many franchises. Will we ever see these franchises again?

For years I have wondered why Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony would allow some franchises to die. When Nintendo, Microsoft or Sony could out source these games. Lets face it other then Rare does Microsoft have a single studio that specializes in platformers? Could any of their studio's give us a great Conker or Banjo title?

But if first parties looked outside of their internal developers they could revive and restore many franchises to their prior greatness. If not to their prior greatness they could at least give fans games for their franchises rather then allowing the franchises to die.

So what do you think should first parties out source more? Microsoft out sources alot buying exclusive rights to third party IP's rather then building their own. But so far they have been reluctant to out source any of Rare's IP's. Nintendo has out sourced F-Zero, Donkey Kong and StarFox with alot of success. Sony outsources abit too.

So should first parties  outsource more IP's to third parties?

No,

make collaborations ? , maybe.

Mostly I'd say go ahead and outsource with some amount of quality control.  DKCR was given to Retro, but Miyamoto and others were checking in making sure the game was fun.  

If any first party outsources a game, they should make sure innovation happens. Retro was able to create superb atmosphere with Primes, aswell as a fresh take on 2D platforming with DKCR.

On a rare occasion I'd say no. If the vision of the series is uniqely belonging to the first party, outsourcing might not work. Pikmin 3 has yet to reach its potential, and likely Miyamoto's vision of the series. 

Moar sequels. MOAR!!!!!!

Retro doesn't count. It's a Nintendo first party studio.

No pretty much all MS does is outsource and the majority of their exclusives are really low quality thats why people only talk about a few exclusives on the 360 despite 360 having more then ps3 

EDIT: In case you don't believe me check out this 360 exclusive http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomberman:_Act_Zero

Exactly Retro doesn't really count. But what about Amusement Vision's F-Zero GX? Or Namco's StarFox:Assualt or Donkey Konga. Personally I loved all four out sourced games (Including DonkeyKonga2). In Japan Nintendo also out sourced Donkey Kong Jungle Beat 2 which was to Capcom and arcade exclusive. Or how about Namco's job bringing Mario Kart to arcades?

For Nintendo at least its worked out pretty well and I'd love to see Nintendo out source some more games this gen. P.S in every Nintendo outsourced product Nintendo did send producers like Miyamoto to ensure the products were up to snuff.

I personally would love seeing some less supported franchises out sourced. Microsoft hires developers to make many of its IP's but so far they are reluctant to actually out source development of their major franchises. Think of what other developers could do with Rare's IP's for example.

Also Jak from Sony unsupported all generation. Rather then allow the franchise to die. Don't you think Nintendo should liscense it out?

I see disaster more often then a good game, look at what actnivision is doing to spyro and they are semi-competent