I was thinking about this for a couple weeks now, but never bothered to try it, before today:
1. It works
2. No significant performance hit.
3. Adjustments necessary (shadows on low ... I am still in the "work-in-progress" discovery phase of fine-tuning the settings for myself)
If you have a NVIDIA card and either a 3D Ready monitor or any other method to play 3D enabled games, give it a try?
Of course, Strategy Games, are not the most inviting video games for 3D gaming. Menus, clicking on units, etc ... is not "optimal", but such a cinematic game like Rome II - when it comes to battles - makes it worth trying?
Btw, I also played Rome I recently in 3D. While it is not "officially" recommended, I enjoyed it quite a bit. Table top wargaming figurines in the hundreds on your monitor screen - it is quite nice, and made me revisit the game again.
To "see" something in these screenshots beyond a blurry mess, you will need stereoscopic colour anaglyph (cyan-red) 3D glasses. NVIDIA even supports this kind of stereoscopic 3D, if you don't have more sophisticated forms of 3D settings. Those (plastic) glasses are available for 5-10 quid?
Some more screenshots - cuz - why not?
Meanwhile, NVIDIA seems to have released an "official" in-game recommendation about the Rome 2 3D Vision settings. According to them the overall status for 3D support is "good".
They recommend turning down the shadows and post-processing. Also, turning off "alpha-vegetation" (duh!)
This is really not something you want to do while playing multiplayer, or even single player battles. But if you want to watch a replay now and then, I can highly recommend it!
Some 2D effects stand out in the flat kind of way. Mostly "smoke", sometimes even clouds, although they look volumetric in regular 3D mode. The shadows in most games are so-and-so. I guess John Carmacks "stencil-shadow" method would be pixel-perfect for these kind of 3D effects? All in all, I am surprised how good this works.