Originally Posted by pugilist777 But im having a hard time understanding if the G constant is a value of a given region of space, or if it is a value of matter itself. 
Neither. It's just a constant which sets the magnitude of the gravitational force between two masses held a certain distance apart. All masses in the Universe seem to interact in the same way, so there is no need for a varying value.
From what i have seen is that the constant is a value of force between two objects, is universal, and is used in most other equations involving relativity and gravity. But i also know that Einstein's theory of gravity states that it is not a force at all, but the warping of space time.

It doesn't say it isn't a force... one can conclude that the gravitational force is a natural consequence of Einstein's theory of gravity and that the theory is superior because it can be applied to objects that don't have mass (e.g. light), replicating observations. The most famous example is the observations of field stars close to the limb of the sun during the solar eclipse.
So how can the G constant be a value of force of gravity when gravity is not a force?

Sometimes gravity seems to behave like a force, so using G is useful.
If you're still puzzled by it, think of this analogy...
Let's say someone comes along and comes up with the "theory of colour" and then says that the colour of something is either "red", "green" or "blue". They apply this to the objects around them and then get satisfactory results, since all of the other colours can be obtained from mixtures of the colours. The theory becomes popular and everyone uses it.
Then someone comes along 100 years later and says "what about black?".
The old theory doesn't seem to have a good explanation of it. The new guy then realizes that a new theory of colour is required, where the red, green and blue components are not just qualitative descriptions, but actual values between 0 to 100. The colour must then be specified as RGB values, with black equal to (0,0,0), white equal to (100,100,100) and everything else being something in between.
Technically, in the new theory, "blue" is no longer correct... it should be specified as "(0,0,100)" or "(0,0,50)" or "(0,0,20)" depending on the shade of blue... but does this mean that using the description "blue" is pointless? It's convenient to be able to still use the description everyone is familiar with because it's simple to understand and describes
most things well.
In the same way, Newton's theory of gravity seems to work very well for most masses. It doesn't stop being useful just because it doesn't work for light, which is ultimately why Einstein's theory is superior.
What does it mean when the kg and s have a negative square value. 6.67408 × 1011 m3 kg1 s2

In simple terms, it means "per". For example:
Speed: "metres per second" is the same as "m/s" or "m s$\displaystyle ^{1}$"
Acceleration: "metres per second squared" is the same as "m/s$\displaystyle ^{2}$" or "m s$\displaystyle ^{2}$".
So the unit you have is "m$\displaystyle ^{3}$ kg$\displaystyle ^{1}$ s$\displaystyle ^{2}$" which is the same as "metres cubed per kilogram per second squared".